Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

brainstorm-experiments头脑风暴实验

Agent Skill

brainstorm-experiments 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,467

周安装

63

GitHub Stars

103

下载量

514
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:brainstorm-experiments(头脑风暴实验)
来源仓库:https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/brainstorm-experiments
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill brainstorm-experiments
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill brainstorm-experiments

简介

brainstorm-experiments 基于精益创业理念设计低成本验证实验,聚焦真实意愿测量。

  • 适用于新功能上线前的小流量测试或商业模式可行性预判。
  • 产出包含 XYZ 假设公式、最小可行原型建议与数据整理指标清单。
  • 强调快速试错而非完美方案,鼓励使用 Landing Page、A/B Test 等轻量手段。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

Experiment Design Expert

Overview

Design fast, low-cost experiments to validate product hypotheses before committing to full development. This skill applies Alberto Savoia's pretotyping philosophy ("Make sure you are building The Right It before you build It right") alongside lean experimentation methods for both new and existing products.

When to Use

  • You have a product idea or feature hypothesis and need to validate it cheaply.
  • You want to test willingness to pay or genuine user interest, not just stated preference.
  • You need to choose the right experiment method for your context (new vs. existing product).

Core Principles

1. XYZ Hypothesis Format

Every experiment starts with a falsifiable hypothesis:

"At least X% of Y will do Z."

ComponentDescriptionExample
X%The success threshold15%
YThe target populationtrial users who reach the dashboard
ZThe specific measurable actionclick "Upgrade to Pro" within 7 days

A good XYZ hypothesis is specific, measurable, and has a clear pass/fail threshold set before the experiment runs.

2. Skin-in-the-Game (SITG)

Stated interest is unreliable. Valid experiments measure actions that require commitment:

  • Money -- Pre-orders, deposits, paid waitlists.
  • Time -- Signing up, completing a multi-step flow, scheduling a demo.
  • Reputation -- Sharing with colleagues, posting publicly.

Always prefer SITG signals over surveys, likes, or verbal feedback.

3. Your Own Data (YODA)

Do not rely on market reports, competitor benchmarks, or industry averages. Run your own experiment with your own audience to get Your Own Data. Others' data reflects their context, not yours.

Experiment Types

For New Products

MethodDescriptionBest ForEffortDuration
Landing PageSingle-page site describing the product with a CTA (sign up, pre-order)Testing value proposition and demandLow1-2 weeks
Explainer VideoShort video demonstrating the concept with a CTATesting comprehension and interestLow-Medium1-2 weeks
Pre-Order / WaitlistAccept payment or email for a product that does not exist yetTesting willingness to payLow2-4 weeks
Concierge MVPDeliver the service manually to a small group, as if automatedTesting whether the solution actually solves the problemMedium2-4 weeks

For Existing Products

MethodDescriptionBest ForEffortDuration
Fake Door TestAdd a button/link for a feature that does not exist; measure clicksTesting demand for a specific featureLow1-2 weeks
Feature StubBuild minimal version (e.g., static mockup) behind a flagTesting engagement with a feature conceptLow-Medium1-2 weeks
A/B TestShow variant to a percentage of users; measure conversionTesting incremental changes to existing flowsMedium2-4 weeks
Wizard of OzFeature appears automated to user but is manually operated behind the scenesTesting complex features before building automationMedium-High2-4 weeks
Survey (In-App)Targeted survey shown to users who match specific behavioral criteriaTesting preferences when SITG methods are impracticalLow1 week

Methodology

Step 1: Write the XYZ Hypothesis

Start with the assumption you need to test. Convert it into XYZ format.

Weak: "Users will like the new dashboard." Strong: "At least 30% of active users who see the new dashboard will set it as their default view within 5 days."

Step 2: Select the Experiment Method

Choose based on:

  • Product type (new vs. existing)
  • What you are testing (demand, usability, willingness to pay, engagement)
  • Available effort (team capacity and timeline)
  • Required confidence (directional signal vs. statistically significant result)

Step 3: Define the Metric and Threshold

ElementDescription
Primary metricThe single number that determines pass/fail
Success thresholdThe minimum value to consider the hypothesis validated
Secondary metricsAdditional signals to watch (but not used for pass/fail)
Guardrail metricsMetrics that must NOT degrade (e.g., existing conversion rate)

Step 4: Run the Experiment

  • Set a timebox. Every experiment has a fixed end date.
  • Do not peek. Avoid checking results daily and making early calls.
  • Document everything. Record setup, audience, duration, and any anomalies.

Step 5: Evaluate Results

OutcomeMeaningNext Action
Clear passMetric exceeds thresholdProceed to build or next validation stage
Clear failMetric well below thresholdPivot, modify hypothesis, or abandon
InconclusiveMetric near threshold or insufficient sampleExtend duration, increase sample, or refine experiment

Python Tool: experiment_designer.py

Design experiments from hypotheses using the CLI tool:

# Run with demo data
python3 scripts/experiment_designer.py --demo

# Run with custom input
python3 scripts/experiment_designer.py input.json

# Output as JSON
python3 scripts/experiment_designer.py input.json --format json

Input Format

{
  "hypotheses": [
    {
      "hypothesis_text": "At least 20% of trial users will click Upgrade within 7 days",
      "target_segment": "trial users on free plan",
      "product_type": "existing"
    }
  ]
}

Output

For each hypothesis, the tool suggests 2-3 experiment designs with method, metric, success threshold, effort level, and duration estimate.

See scripts/experiment_designer.py for full documentation.

Output Template

Use assets/experiment_plan_template.md to document each experiment:

  • Experiment card with hypothesis, method, metric, threshold, owner, timeline
  • Experiment tracker for managing multiple concurrent experiments
  • Results documentation for recording outcomes and decisions

Integration with Other Discovery Skills

  • Use brainstorm-ideas/ to generate ideas that become hypotheses.
  • Use identify-assumptions/ to find the riskiest assumptions to test.
  • After experiments, use pre-mortem/ before committing to full build.

Troubleshooting

SymptomLikely CauseResolution
Tool suggests only low-SITG experimentsHypothesis text lacks action-oriented keywords (pay, purchase, upgrade)Rewrite hypothesis using explicit behavioral verbs; check KEYWORD_SIGNALS mapping in script
All experiments recommended are the same methodHypothesis signals are too narrow or product_type is wrongVerify product_type is set correctly (new vs. existing); broaden hypothesis to cover more intent signals
Demo mode works but custom input failsInput JSON schema does not match expected format (missing hypotheses key)Validate JSON has top-level hypotheses array with hypothesis_text, target_segment, product_type per entry
Experiment results are always inconclusiveSample size too small or experiment duration too short for the metricExtend timebox, increase traffic allocation, or choose a metric with higher signal-to-noise ratio
Fake door test shows high clicks but feature never buildsNo decision framework tied to experiment outcomeDefine clear pass/fail thresholds before running; document the "if pass, then build" commitment upfront
Team runs experiments but never acts on resultsResults not connected to roadmap or prioritization processFeed experiment outcomes into identify-assumptions/ for re-scoring; link to execution/outcome-roadmap/

Success Criteria

  • Every product hypothesis has a falsifiable XYZ statement before experiment design begins
  • Experiments measure Skin-in-the-Game (SITG) signals, not stated preferences
  • Pass/fail thresholds are defined before the experiment runs, not after
  • Experiment duration does not exceed 4 weeks for any single hypothesis
  • At least 70% of experiments produce a clear pass or fail verdict (not inconclusive)
  • Results directly feed the build/pivot/abandon decision within 1 week of experiment completion
  • Your Own Data (YODA) principle is followed -- no reliance on industry benchmarks for go/no-go decisions

Scope & Limitations

In Scope:

  • XYZ hypothesis formulation and validation for product ideas
  • Experiment method selection for both new products (landing page, pre-order, concierge, explainer video) and existing products (fake door, feature stub, A/B test, Wizard of Oz, in-app survey)
  • Automated experiment design suggestions based on hypothesis keyword analysis
  • Metric selection, success threshold definition, and effort/duration estimation

Out of Scope:

  • Statistical power analysis or sample size calculation (use dedicated A/B test platforms)
  • Experiment infrastructure setup (feature flags, analytics instrumentation)
  • Running the actual experiment (this skill designs experiments, not executes them)
  • Long-term product strategy or roadmap decisions (see execution/outcome-roadmap/)

Important Caveats:

  • Pretotyping is for validating demand and value, not for measuring usability or performance.
  • In-app surveys are the weakest SITG signal. Use them only when behavioral experiments are impractical.
  • The tool's keyword-to-signal matching is heuristic-based. Review suggested experiments and override when domain knowledge dictates a better method.

Integration Points

IntegrationDirectionDescription
brainstorm-ideas/Receives fromIdeas generated become hypotheses for experiment design
identify-assumptions/Receives from"Test Now" assumptions become hypotheses for this skill
pre-mortem/Feeds intoExperiment results inform pre-mortem risk assessment before full build
execution/create-prd/Feeds intoValidated hypotheses become PRD assumptions with evidence
execution/brainstorm-okrs/Feeds intoExperiment metrics may become OKR key results
execution/outcome-roadmap/Feeds intoExperiment outcomes inform Now/Next/Later roadmap placement

Tool Reference

experiment_designer.py

Suggests 2-3 experiment designs for each product hypothesis based on keyword signal analysis.

FlagTypeDefaultDescription
input_filepositional(optional)Path to JSON file with hypotheses array
--demoflagoffRun with built-in sample data (3 hypotheses)
--formatchoicetextOutput format: text or json

References

  • Alberto Savoia, *The Right It* (2019)
  • Eric Ries, *The Lean Startup* (2011)
  • Jeff Gothelf & Josh Seiden, *Lean UX* (2013)
  • Teresa Torres, *Continuous Discovery Habits* (2021)

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

36%
按下载量换算185

Claude

28.67%
按下载量换算147

Cursor

19.06%
按下载量换算98

Gemini CLI

8.89%
按下载量换算46

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills