CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

ab-testing

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "statistical significance," "how long should I run this test," "growth experiments," "experiment velocity," "experiment backlog," "ICE score," "experimentation program," or "experiment playbook." Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches and wants to measure which performs better, or when they want to build a systematic experimentation practice. For tracking implementation, see analytics. For page-level conversion optimization, see cro.

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is a highly actionable, well-structured guide with concrete templates, numeric guidance, and functioning one-level references. Its main cost is token efficiency: redundant warnings, a p-value primer Claude doesn't need, and inline detail that could move to the existing reference pattern.

Suggestions

Trim the "Statistical Significance" explainer to the reporting-relevant guidance (interpretation cautions, ASA reference) and drop the textbook definitions of p-values and confidence intervals that Claude already knows.

Consolidate the anti-peeking guidance, which currently appears in Core Principles ("Don't peek and stop early"), During the Test ("Peek at results and stop early"), and its own "The Peeking Problem" section, into a single authoritative section.

Move the Growth Experimentation Program detail (hypothesis generation sources, velocity metrics, playbook template, cadence) into a references/ file like the other detail domains, keeping a summary and the experiment loop inline.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient (tables, checklists, templates earn their tokens), but it includes a stats-101 primer on p-values and confidence intervals that Claude already knows, repeats the anti-peeking warning in three places (Core Principles, "Avoid," and its own section), and duplicates sample-size tables that also exist in the reference file — more than the minor trimming of anchor 4, fitting anchor 3.

3 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is fully executable for an instruction-only skill: a copy-paste hypothesis template with weak/strong examples, a numeric sample-size quick-reference table, a concrete metrics example (pricing page test), named tools per implementation approach, ICE formula, a fill-in playbook template, and pre-launch/analysis checklists — matching anchor 5's coverage of common cases.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The test lifecycle is clearly ordered (Initial Assessment → Hypothesis → Design → Pre-Launch checklist → During the Test → Analysis checklist → Documentation) with checklist checkpoints and a guardrail stop rule ("do stop tests where guardrails are significantly negative"). However, the end-to-end sequence is implied by section order rather than stated explicitly, and error-recovery feedback loops are only partial (e.g., "Mixed signals → check data quality"), so it fits anchor 4 rather than anchor 5's explicit validate-fix-retry loops.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Two real, clearly signaled, one-level-deep references exist and match their in-body claims (sample-size-guide.md, test-templates.md), but substantial detail is still inline — a full 4×4 sample-size table alongside the reference file and an ~85-line Growth Experimentation Program section — matching anchor 4's "few key examples inline, bulk in separate file" rather than anchor 5's pointer-style split.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

91%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description with explicit what/when structure, comprehensive natural trigger phrasing, and good boundary routing to adjacent skills. Its main weaknesses are somewhat generic capability verbs and a few broad trigger terms with minor overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment, or build a growth experimentation program" lists several actions covering both single tests and program-building, but the verbs are generic and capabilities like sample-size calculation and significance analysis are only implied through triggers — several specific actions with minor gaps (anchor 4), not the comprehensive distinct operations of anchor 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers "what" (plan, design, implement A/B tests; build a growth experimentation program) and "when" through multiple explicit clauses ("Also use when the user mentions...", "Use this whenever someone is comparing two approaches..."), with concrete trigger phrases plus boundary routing ("For tracking implementation, see analytics. For page-level conversion optimization, see cro.") — a clear anchor 5 match.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

The trigger list is comprehensive and natural — "A/B test," "split test," "multivariate test," "should I test this," "which version is better," "test two versions," "how long should I run this test," "ICE score," "experiment playbook" — covering synonyms, user-phrased questions, and program-level terms, matching anchor 5's comprehensive natural-term coverage.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The experimentation niche is clear and adjacent skills are explicitly disambiguated (analytics, cro), but broad triggers like "experiment," "hypothesis," and "test this change" carry minor overlap risk with general testing or statistics contexts — mostly distinct with minor overlap (anchor 4) rather than the minimal-conflict anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

coreyhaines31/marketingskills

Path

skills/ab-testing/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.