Claude
572b8acf8c
Make the library multi-platform without duplicating content. Each skills/<name>/SKILL.md body remains the single source of truth; a new generator renders platform-ready exports from it. - scripts/build-exports.mjs — dependency-free Node generator with a PLATFORMS registry so new platforms (Gemini, Cursor, …) are a few lines. Ships ChatGPT exports at exports/chatgpt/<bundle>/<skill>/SYSTEM_PROMPT.md (172 skills), plus generated index READMEs. Supports --platform and --check. - exports/ — generated ChatGPT system prompts, ready to paste into a Custom GPT. - .github/workflows/check-generated.yml — fails a PR if exports or web/skills.json drift from the source skills. - README "Works With" now documents the ready-to-use exports and regen command. - CHANGELOG + SKILL-AUTHORING-STANDARD note the generated artifacts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016JWn5jRD5tcEFKrubjQ6Px
3.1 KiB
3.1 KiB
Product Health Analysis Skill
Transform raw metrics data into a clear health narrative — what's working, what's not, and what needs immediate attention.
Required Inputs
Ask the user for these if not provided:
- Metrics data (current values for key metrics — even rough numbers work)
- Targets or benchmarks (OKR targets, historical baselines, or industry benchmarks)
- Period (week / month / quarter being analysed)
- Product area or segment (are we looking at the whole product or a specific feature?)
Metrics Framework
Analyse across four layers:
- Acquisition — new users, source quality, CAC trends
- Activation — time to first value, onboarding completion rates
- Engagement — DAU/MAU, feature adoption, session depth
- Retention — D1/D7/D30 retention, churn rate, resurrection rate
Process
- For each metric, compare: current period vs. previous period, current vs. target
- Flag anything more than 10% off target as requiring investigation
- Look for correlations — does a drop in activation explain a retention dip 2 weeks later?
- Write a plain-English health summary (no jargon) suitable for sharing with non-data stakeholders
- Recommend top 3 areas for immediate investigation with suggested diagnostic steps
- Validate — Confirm every flagged metric has a plausible root cause hypothesis, not just a raw number, and every recommended action has a specific owner or team
Output Structure
Product Health Report — [Period]
Overall Health: 🟢 On Track / 🟡 Watch / 🔴 Action Required
| Metric | Current | Target | vs. Last Period | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [metric] | [value] | [target] | [+/-%] | [🟢/🟡/🔴] |
Key Observations: [3-5 bullet observations written in plain English]
Areas Requiring Investigation:
- [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
- [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
- [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
Recommended Actions: [Specific next steps with owners and timelines]
Quality Checks
- Every metric includes both a target and a trend (not just a snapshot)
- At least one correlation is drawn between metrics (e.g., activation → retention)
- Every flagged metric has a root cause hypothesis, not just "it dropped"
- Observations are written for a non-technical stakeholder (no raw query language or data jargon)
- Overall health rating is justified with specific evidence
Anti-Patterns
- Do not report a single aggregate metric without segment breakdowns — averages hide opposing trends
- Do not flag a metric as healthy just because it is above the target — check if the target itself is meaningful
- Do not list metric movements without root cause hypotheses — observations without explanations are not analysis
- Do not mix product health metrics with business KPIs without explaining the relationship between them
- Do not omit recommended actions — a health report that only describes problems without prioritised next steps is incomplete