agentleFS
timscheueraitimscheuerai/gtm-architecture-template/.agents/skills/split-test-designer/SKILL.md

split-test-designer

Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Define one interpretable outbound experiment with frozen account-level assignment, copy versions and outcome measures.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the experiment example, assignment and analysis.

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    Use assign_test_variant with the canonical account key.

    line 12
  3. Very specific:

    Write both variants using outbound-copywriter.

    line 14

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Design one test

Read the experiment example, assignment and analysis.

Write the hypothesis before seeing outcomes. Define the eligible company/persona cohort, randomisation unit, two variant IDs, one changed dimension, fixed fields, observation window, primary metric and review trigger. A CTA comparison is a useful starting point when the offer and audience are already credible; it is not a universal rule.

Use assign_test_variant with the canonical account key. Freeze test_round, group_id, variant order and assignment algorithm for the round. Colleagues in one account receive the same variant. Keep prompt_version on every generated message and outcome.

Write both variants using outbound-copywriter; keep everything outside the tested dimension fixed. Avoid spintax on the test variable. Sender, timing and source differences can confound the result; record them.

Measure delivered enrollments, positive replies and meetings with deduplicated event IDs. State definitions and attribution window. Small-sample results remain descriptive; the example floor is a review trigger, not a significance calculation. Account-level assignment also means outcomes from colleagues are not independent observations.

Deliver a saved test plan and variant bodies. After results, use analyse_results for descriptive counts, document limitations and propose one next change. Do not automatically overwrite ICP or declare a winner from the larger raw reply count.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.