From product-eval
Designs the cheapest experiment to de-risk a promising but under-evidenced bet: names the riskiest assumption, picks a falsifiable test method, sets a pass/fail threshold, and outputs a one-page test spec.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/product-eval:design-testThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
When a bet is promising but under-evidenced (a **Run a research sprint** verdict), the answer isn't to build or to drop it, it's to run the cheapest experiment that would move Confidence past the gate. This skill designs that experiment. It is the bridge that *generates new first-party signal*, where `gather-evidence` only pulls existing data.
When a bet is promising but under-evidenced (a Run a research sprint verdict), the answer isn't to build or to drop it, it's to run the cheapest experiment that would move Confidence past the gate. This skill designs that experiment. It is the bridge that generates new first-party signal, where gather-evidence only pulls existing data.
After decision-readiness returns Run a research sprint (or Do not commit yet with a clear hypothesis), or when the user asks how to validate / de-risk a bet. Read the open gaps from .product-eval/<scope>/decisions-log.md, those are exactly what the test must close.
From the gaps, find the single assumption that, if wrong, kills the bet (e.g. "clients miss the email because of spam" vs "they just ignore it"). Test that, not everything.
Match the assumption to the lightest test that could prove it wrong (see references/experiment-patterns.md): fake-door / smoke test, landing page + ad, concierge / Wizard-of-Oz, 5-10 interviews, a survey, an A/B test, or an instrumentation change. Prefer lowest cost and fastest signal.
State what result counts as pass vs fail, a specific number and window (e.g. "≥15% of ~200 landing visitors leave an email in 2 weeks; below 8% kills it"). No post-hoc goalposts.
Output: hypothesis · method · audience and sample size · what to instrument · effort/cost · duration · pass/fail threshold. Keep it the smallest test that would change the decision.
The test produces new first-party evidence (strength 4-5). When results are in, feed them through gather-evidence, then re-run decision-readiness, Confidence should move, and the bet becomes Decide-now or gets killed honestly.
A one-page test spec (riskiest assumption · method · sample · instrumentation · effort · duration · pass/fail threshold) plus the explicit "what result would change the decision." Log it in .product-eval/<scope>/decisions-log.md. End with Next move: and tell the user to run the test, then feed the results back as evidence for a new readiness call.
npx claudepluginhub sparkline-ventures/product-evalDesigns smallest viable tests to validate or invalidate critical assumptions using Torres framework and Gilad's AFTER model (Assessment to Release Results).
Designs low-cost experiments—prototypes, A/B tests, spikes, Wizard of Oz—to validate assumptions in existing products. Use for cheap feature idea testing before full implementation.
Defines a lightweight Proof of Life probe to test risky hypotheses cheaply before building. Use when you need harsh truth before committing engineering time.