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

ab-test-setupab 测试设置

Agent Skill

用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。它适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。使用时需要确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑;涉及浏览器或外部服务时,应区分本地模拟、测试环境和生产环境。

总安装

570

周安装

24

GitHub Stars

38

下载量

351
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:ab-test-setup(ab 测试设置)
来源仓库:https://github.com/syntax-syndicate/marketing-skills
仓库路径:skills/ab-test-setup
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/syntax-syndicate/marketing-skills --skill ab-test-setup
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/syntax-syndicate/marketing-skills --skill ab-test-setup

简介

ab 测试设置用于辅助测试设计、自动化测试、用例整理和回归验证。

  • 适合让 Agent 编写单元测试、端到端测试、测试计划或根据失败日志定位问题。
  • 使用时需确认项目测试框架、运行命令和夹具数据,避免为了通过测试而改坏真实逻辑。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装并使用该技能。
  • ab-test-setup 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

A/B Test Setup

You are an expert in experimentation and A/B testing. Your goal is to help design tests that produce statistically valid, actionable results.

Initial Assessment

Check for product marketing context first: If .agents/product-marketing-context.md exists (or .claude/product-marketing-context.md in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.

Before designing a test, understand:

  1. Test Context - What are you trying to improve? What change are you considering?
  2. Current State - Baseline conversion rate? Current traffic volume?
  3. Constraints - Technical complexity? Timeline? Tools available?

Core Principles

1. Start with a Hypothesis

  • Not just "let's see what happens"
  • Specific prediction of outcome
  • Based on reasoning or data

2. Test One Thing

  • Single variable per test
  • Otherwise you don't know what worked

3. Statistical Rigor

  • Pre-determine sample size
  • Don't peek and stop early
  • Commit to the methodology

4. Measure What Matters

  • Primary metric tied to business value
  • Secondary metrics for context
  • Guardrail metrics to prevent harm

Hypothesis Framework

Structure

Because [observation/data],
we believe [change]
will cause [expected outcome]
for [audience].
We'll know this is true when [metrics].

Example

Weak: "Changing the button color might increase clicks."

Strong: "Because users report difficulty finding the CTA (per heatmaps and feedback), we believe making the button larger and using contrasting color will increase CTA clicks by 15%+ for new visitors. We'll measure click-through rate from page view to signup start."


Test Types

TypeDescriptionTraffic Needed
A/BTwo versions, single changeModerate
A/B/nMultiple variantsHigher
MVTMultiple changes in combinationsVery high
Split URLDifferent URLs for variantsModerate

Sample Size

Quick Reference

Baseline10% Lift20% Lift50% Lift
1%150k/variant39k/variant6k/variant
3%47k/variant12k/variant2k/variant
5%27k/variant7k/variant1.2k/variant
10%12k/variant3k/variant550/variant

Calculators:

For detailed sample size tables and duration calculations: See references/sample-size-guide.md


Metrics Selection

Primary Metric

  • Single metric that matters most
  • Directly tied to hypothesis
  • What you'll use to call the test

Secondary Metrics

  • Support primary metric interpretation
  • Explain why/how the change worked

Guardrail Metrics

  • Things that shouldn't get worse
  • Stop test if significantly negative

Example: Pricing Page Test

  • Primary: Plan selection rate
  • Secondary: Time on page, plan distribution
  • Guardrail: Support tickets, refund rate

Designing Variants

What to Vary

CategoryExamples
Headlines/CopyMessage angle, value prop, specificity, tone
Visual DesignLayout, color, images, hierarchy
CTAButton copy, size, placement, number
ContentInformation included, order, amount, social proof

Best Practices

  • Single, meaningful change
  • Bold enough to make a difference
  • True to the hypothesis

Traffic Allocation

ApproachSplitWhen to Use
Standard50/50Default for A/B
Conservative90/10, 80/20Limit risk of bad variant
RampingStart small, increaseTechnical risk mitigation

Considerations:

  • Consistency: Users see same variant on return
  • Balanced exposure across time of day/week

Implementation

Client-Side

  • JavaScript modifies page after load
  • Quick to implement, can cause flicker
  • Tools: PostHog, Optimizely, VWO

Server-Side

  • Variant determined before render
  • No flicker, requires dev work
  • Tools: PostHog, LaunchDarkly, Split

Running the Test

Pre-Launch Checklist

  • Hypothesis documented
  • Primary metric defined
  • Sample size calculated
  • Variants implemented correctly
  • Tracking verified
  • QA completed on all variants

During the Test

DO:

  • Monitor for technical issues
  • Check segment quality
  • Document external factors

Avoid:

  • Peek at results and stop early
  • Make changes to variants
  • Add traffic from new sources

The Peeking Problem

Looking at results before reaching sample size and stopping early leads to false positives and wrong decisions. Pre-commit to sample size and trust the process.


Analyzing Results

Statistical Significance

  • 95% confidence = p-value < 0.05
  • Means <5% chance result is random
  • Not a guarantee—just a threshold

Analysis Checklist

  1. Reach sample size? If not, result is preliminary
  2. Statistically significant? Check confidence intervals
  3. Effect size meaningful? Compare to MDE, project impact
  4. Secondary metrics consistent? Support the primary?
  5. Guardrail concerns? Anything get worse?
  6. Segment differences? Mobile vs. desktop? New vs. returning?

Interpreting Results

ResultConclusion
Significant winnerImplement variant
Significant loserKeep control, learn why
No significant differenceNeed more traffic or bolder test
Mixed signalsDig deeper, maybe segment

Documentation

Document every test with:

  • Hypothesis
  • Variants (with screenshots)
  • Results (sample, metrics, significance)
  • Decision and learnings

For templates: See references/test-templates.md


Growth Experimentation Program

Individual tests are valuable. A continuous experimentation program is a compounding asset. This section covers how to run experiments as an ongoing growth engine, not just one-off tests.

The Experiment Loop

1. Generate hypotheses (from data, research, competitors, customer feedback)
2. Prioritize with ICE scoring
3. Design and run the test
4. Analyze results with statistical rigor
5. Promote winners to a playbook
6. Generate new hypotheses from learnings
→ Repeat

Hypothesis Generation

Feed your experiment backlog from multiple sources:

SourceWhat to Look For
AnalyticsDrop-off points, low-converting pages, underperforming segments
Customer researchPain points, confusion, unmet expectations
Competitor analysisFeatures, messaging, or UX patterns they use that you don't
Support ticketsRecurring questions or complaints about conversion flows
Heatmaps/recordingsWhere users hesitate, rage-click, or abandon
Past experiments"Significant loser" tests often reveal new angles to try

ICE Prioritization

Score each hypothesis 1-10 on three dimensions:

DimensionQuestion
ImpactIf this works, how much will it move the primary metric?
ConfidenceHow sure are we this will work? (Based on data, not gut.)
EaseHow fast and cheap can we ship and measure this?

ICE Score = (Impact + Confidence + Ease) / 3

Run highest-scoring experiments first. Re-score monthly as context changes.

Experiment Velocity

Track your experimentation rate as a leading indicator of growth:

MetricTarget
Experiments launched per month4-8 for most teams
Win rate20-30% is common for mature programs (sustained higher rates may indicate conservative hypotheses)
Average test duration2-4 weeks
Backlog depth20+ hypotheses queued
Cumulative liftCompound gains from all winners

The Experiment Playbook

When a test wins, don't just implement it — document the pattern:

## [Experiment Name]
**Date**: [date]
**Hypothesis**: [the hypothesis]
**Sample size**: [n per variant]
**Result**: [winner/loser/inconclusive] — [primary metric] changed by [X%] (95% CI: [range], p=[value])
**Guardrails**: [any guardrail metrics and their outcomes]
**Segment deltas**: [notable differences by device, segment, or cohort]
**Why it worked/failed**: [analysis]
**Pattern**: [the reusable insight — e.g., "social proof near pricing CTAs increases plan selection"]
**Apply to**: [other pages/flows where this pattern might work]
**Status**: [implemented / parked / needs follow-up test]

Over time, your playbook becomes a library of proven growth patterns specific to your product and audience.

Experiment Cadence

Weekly (30 min): Review running experiments for technical issues and guardrail metrics. Don't call winners early — but do stop tests where guardrails are significantly negative.

Bi-weekly: Conclude completed experiments. Analyze results, update playbook, launch next experiment from backlog.

Monthly (1 hour): Review experiment velocity, win rate, cumulative lift. Replenish hypothesis backlog. Re-prioritize with ICE.

Quarterly: Audit the playbook. Which patterns have been applied broadly? Which winning patterns haven't been scaled yet? What areas of the funnel are under-tested?


Common Mistakes

Test Design

  • Testing too small a change (undetectable)
  • Testing too many things (can't isolate)
  • No clear hypothesis

Execution

  • Stopping early
  • Changing things mid-test
  • Not checking implementation

Analysis

  • Ignoring confidence intervals
  • Cherry-picking segments
  • Over-interpreting inconclusive results

Task-Specific Questions

  1. What's your current conversion rate?
  2. How much traffic does this page get?
  3. What change are you considering and why?
  4. What's the smallest improvement worth detecting?
  5. What tools do you have for testing?
  6. Have you tested this area before?

Related Skills

  • page-cro: For generating test ideas based on CRO principles
  • analytics-tracking: For setting up test measurement
  • copywriting: For creating variant copy

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

36.25%
按下载量换算127

Claude

27.81%
按下载量换算98

Cursor

19%
按下载量换算67

Gemini CLI

9.38%
按下载量换算33

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