Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

bookforge-conversation-question-designer(Bookforge 对话问题设计器)

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 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。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为调用外部服务;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 31,786。

总安装 2,642周安装 109GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 863核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:bookforge-conversation-question-designer(Bookforge 对话问题设计器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/quochungto/bookforge-conversation-question-designer
安装命令:
openclaw skills install bookforge-conversation-question-designer
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install bookforge-conversation-question-designer

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

设计能提取真实行为数据的访谈问题避免主观偏差。重写现有问题以提升信息有效性与回答真实性。适用于用户调研、竞品分析等研究型任务。安装命令:openclaw skills install bookforge-conversation-question-designer 应避免引导性问题或预设答案倾向。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install bookforge-conversation-question-designer;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要调用外部服务,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install bookforge-conversation-question-designer。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 需要什么权限?

权限级别是调用外部服务。该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,642 次,近一周安装 109 次,下载 863 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

bookforge-conversation-question-designer 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
bookforge-conversation-question-designer

Bookforge 对话问题设计器 · 本页

2,642—调用外部服务MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
conversation-question-designer
description
Write, rewrite, or audit customer interview questions so they extract honest behavioral data instead of false validation. Use this skill whenever the user needs to prepare a conversation script for customer discovery, draft questions for an upcoming interview, fix questions that keep producing useless or vague answers, rewrite biased or leading questions into past-focused behavior-revealing ones, check whether their interview questions will trigger compliments instead of facts, or build a question list from learning goals — even if they don't mention "question design" or "The Mom Test." Do NOT use this skill to analyze conversation notes after a meeting (use conversation-data-quality-analyzer) or to decide which questions matter most strategically (use question-importance-prioritizer).
version
1.0.0
homepage
https://github.com/bookforge-ai/bookforge-skills/tree/main/books/the-mom-test/skills/conversation-question-designer
metadata
{"openclaw":{"emoji":"📚","homepage":"https://github.com/bookforge-ai/bookforge-skills"}}
status
verified
source-books
title
The Mom Test
authors
["Rob Fitzpatrick"]
chapters
[1]
tags
[customer-discovery, interview-questions, customer-conversations, validation, question-design]
depends-on
[]
execution
tier
1
mode
hybrid
inputs
description
Product idea description, draft question list, or conversation topic
tools-required
[Read, Write]
tools-optional
[]
mcps-required
[]
environment
Any agent environment with file read/write access.

Conversation Question Designer

When to Use

You are preparing for a customer conversation and need questions that will produce honest, useful data rather than false validation. Typical situations:

  • The user has a list of draft interview questions and wants them reviewed or improved
  • The user is about to talk to potential customers and needs a conversation script
  • The user wants to validate a product idea but is not sure what to ask
  • The user has a conversation topic or learning goal but no specific questions yet
  • The user received unhelpful answers from previous conversations and wants to fix their approach

Before starting, verify:

  • Does the user have a product idea or problem area to explore? (If not, help them articulate one first)
  • Does the user know who they will be talking to? (Customer type affects which questions matter most)

Mode: Hybrid — The agent designs the question script and analyzes/rewrites questions. The human conducts the actual conversation.

Context & Input Gathering

Required Context (must have — ask if missing)

  • Product idea or problem area: What is the user building or exploring? This shapes which behaviors and past experiences to ask about.

→ Check prompt for: product descriptions, problem statements, startup ideas, feature concepts → Check environment for: product-idea.md, README.md, pitch documents → If still missing, ask: "What product idea or problem area are you exploring? A sentence or two is enough."

  • Learning goals: What does the user want to learn from these conversations? This determines which questions matter most.

→ Check prompt for: assumptions to validate, unknowns, hypotheses, "I want to find out..." → Check environment for: learning-log.md, question-script.md, previous conversation notes → If still missing, ask: "What are the 1-3 most important things you want to learn from these conversations?"

Observable Context (gather from environment)

  • Existing question drafts: Check for prepared questions the user wants reviewed

→ Look for: question-script.md, question lists in the prompt, bullet-pointed questions → If unavailable: generate questions from scratch based on learning goals

  • Customer segment: Who will the user be talking to?

→ Look for: customer-segments.md, persona descriptions, target market references → If unavailable: ask "Who will you be talking to? (e.g., small business owners, enterprise CTOs, parents)"

  • Previous conversation notes: Past learnings that should inform new questions

→ Look for: conversation-notes/, learning-log.md → If unavailable: assume first round of conversations

Default Assumptions

  • If no customer type specified → design questions generic enough for early exploration, note this limitation
  • If no stage specified → assume pre-product (learning phase, not selling)
  • If no prior conversations → assume this is the first batch and questions should start broad

Sufficiency Threshold

SUFFICIENT when ALL of these are true:
- Product idea or problem area is known
- At least 1 learning goal is identified
- Customer type is known or defaulted

PROCEED WITH DEFAULTS when:
- Product idea is known but learning goals are vague
- Customer type is approximate ("probably small businesses")

MUST ASK when:
- No product idea or problem area at all
- User provides questions but no context on what they are building

Process

Step 1: Extract Learning Goals

ACTION: Identify the 3 most important things the user needs to learn from upcoming conversations. If the user has provided learning goals, validate them. If not, derive them from their product idea and assumptions.

WHY: Questions without clear learning goals produce scattered, unusable data. Every question in the script must connect to a specific learning goal, otherwise the conversation wanders and the user leaves with opinions instead of facts.

IF the user has stated learning goals → validate they are about customer behavior/problems (not about validating the solution) IF learning goals are solution-focused (e.g., "Would people use my app?") → reframe toward the underlying behavior: "How are people currently solving this problem?"

OUTPUT: A numbered list of 3 learning goals, each framed as a behavior or fact to discover (not an opinion to collect).

Step 2: Audit Existing Questions (if provided)

ACTION: Evaluate each question against the 3 customer conversation quality rules (The Mom Test):

RuleTestFailure Pattern
Rule 1: Their life, not your ideaDoes this question ask about the customer's actual behavior, problems, or workflow — or does it ask them to evaluate your concept?Questions containing "my idea," "this product," "would you use," "do you think"
Rule 2: Specifics in the past, not generics about the futureDoes this question ask about concrete events that already happened — or does it ask for predictions, hypotheticals, or generalizations?Questions containing "would you," "will you," "do you ever," "how much would you pay," future tense
Rule 3: Listen more than talkDoes this question invite an open-ended response — or does it lead toward a specific answer?Yes/no questions, questions with the answer embedded, multi-part questions that overwhelm

WHY: Bad questions are the default. Most people naturally ask opinion-seeking, future-hypothetical, or idea-validating questions because those feel productive. But the answers to those questions are worthless — people are overly optimistic about the future and will lie to avoid hurting your feelings. Auditing against these 3 rules catches the specific failure modes before the conversation happens.

FOR EACH question in the user's draft list:

  1. Rate as PASS, FAIL, or FIXABLE against each of the 3 rules
  2. If FAIL or FIXABLE → identify which rule(s) it violates and why
  3. Write a rewritten version that passes all 3 rules
  4. Note what learning goal this question serves (or flag it as goalless)

IF no existing questions are provided → skip to Step 3.

Step 3: Generate the Question Script

ACTION: Build a structured conversation script organized by learning goal. For each learning goal, create 3-5 questions that progress from broad to specific.

WHY: Conversations need structure to produce usable data, but rigid scripts kill natural flow. Organizing by learning goal lets the human navigate flexibly — they can follow interesting threads while keeping track of what they still need to learn. Starting broad prevents premature zoom (asking about a specific problem before confirming the person even cares about that area).

Question design rules — apply to every question:

  1. Ask about their life, not your idea. Frame questions around their current behavior, workflows, problems, and goals. Never mention your product concept unless deliberately testing a later-stage hypothesis.
  1. Ask about specifics in the past, not generics about the future. Replace "Would you..." with "When was the last time..." Replace "Do you usually..." with "Talk me through what happened last time..." Past behavior is the only reliable predictor.
  1. Use open questions that invite stories. "Talk me through..." and "Tell me about the last time..." produce richer data than "Do you..." or "How often do you..."
  1. Include motivation-revealing questions. "Why do you bother?" and "What are the implications?" separate must-solve problems from nice-to-haves.
  1. Include commitment-testing questions. "What have you already tried to solve this?" and "How are you dealing with it now?" reveal whether the problem is painful enough to drive action.
  1. End with network-expanding questions. "Who else should I talk to?" and "Is there anything else I should have asked?" generate warm introductions and catch blind spots.

Script structure per learning goal:

## Learning Goal: [goal description]

### Opener (broad, non-leading)
- [Question that explores whether this area matters to them at all]

### Depth questions (specific, past-focused)
- [Question about concrete past behavior]
- [Question about current workflow/workaround]
- [Question about implications/severity]

### Commitment signal (reveals real vs stated priority)
- [Question about what they have tried or are spending]

Step 4: Add Anti-Bias Safeguards

ACTION: Review the complete script for common bias traps and add inline warnings where the human might accidentally slip into bad patterns during the conversation.

WHY: Even with good prepared questions, conversations go off-script. The human needs to recognize danger signals in real-time. Adding warnings at specific points in the script acts as a field guide during the conversation.

Bias traps to flag:

TrapSignalRecovery
Compliment fishingYou just described your idea and they said "That sounds great!"Deflect: "Thanks — but tell me, how are you currently handling this?"
Accepting vague enthusiasmThey say "I would definitely use that" or "That is exactly what I need"Anchor: "When was the last time this problem came up? Walk me through what happened."
Pitching instead of askingYou have been talking for more than 30 seconds without asking a questionStop and ask: "Sorry, I got excited. Can I ask — how are you dealing with this right now?"
Leading toward your solutionYour question contains your product's features or approachReframe around their problem, not your solution
Accepting generic claimsThey say "I usually..." or "I always..." or "I never..."Anchor: "Can you tell me about the most recent specific time?"

Step 5: Produce the Deliverable

ACTION: Write the final question script as a structured document the user can reference during their conversation.

WHY: The deliverable must be usable in the field — not a theoretical analysis. It should fit on a single page, be scannable during a live conversation, and clearly connect each question to what the user is trying to learn.

Output format:

# Conversation Question Script

## Context
- **Product/Problem Area:** [from input]
- **Target Customer:** [from input]
- **Date Prepared:** [today]

## Learning Goals
1. [Goal 1]
2. [Goal 2]
3. [Goal 3]

## Question Script

### Learning Goal 1: [description]

**Opener:** [broad question]

**Depth:**
- [specific past-focused question]
- [workflow/workaround question]
- [implication/severity question]

**Commitment signal:** [what-have-you-tried question]

> WATCH OUT: [relevant bias trap warning]

### Learning Goal 2: [description]
[same structure]

### Learning Goal 3: [description]
[same structure]

## Closing Questions (use for every conversation)
- "Who else should I talk to?" — generates warm intros
- "Is there anything else I should have asked?" — catches blind spots

## Quick Reference: Bias Recovery
| If you hear... | Do this... |
|----------------|-----------|
| "That sounds great!" | Deflect → ask about their current process |
| "I would definitely..." | Anchor → ask about most recent specific instance |
| "I usually/always/never..." | Anchor → "Tell me about the last time" |
| Feature requests | Dig → "Why do you want that? What would it let you do?" |

## Questions Rewritten (if audit was performed)
| # | Original (FAIL) | Rewritten (PASS) | Rule Violated |
|---|-----------------|------------------|---------------|
| 1 | [original] | [rewritten] | [rule 1/2/3] |

IF the user provided a file path or working directory → write the output to question-script.md ELSE → present the output directly in the conversation

Examples

Scenario: Founder with draft questions about a project management tool

Trigger: "I'm building a project management tool for freelancers. Here are my interview questions: 1) Do you think a simpler project management tool would be useful? 2) Would you pay $10/month for it? 3) How do you manage your projects?"

Process:

  1. Extract learning goals: (a) Do freelancers have project management pain? (b) What do they currently use? (c) Would they pay for a solution?
  2. Audit existing questions:

- Q1 FAIL (Rule 1: asks them to evaluate your idea; Rule 2: hypothetical) - Q2 FAIL (Rule 1: about your product; Rule 2: hypothetical pricing) - Q3 FIXABLE (Rule 2: too generic, needs past-tense anchoring)

  1. Generate rewritten script with depth questions

Output (abbreviated):

## Questions Rewritten
| # | Original (FAIL) | Rewritten (PASS) | Rule Violated |
|---|-----------------|------------------|---------------|
| 1 | "Do you think a simpler PM tool would be useful?" | "Tell me about the last project you managed. What went well and what was frustrating?" | Rule 1, Rule 2 |
| 2 | "Would you pay $10/month for it?" | "How much time do you spend on project admin each week? What tools are you paying for right now?" | Rule 1, Rule 2 |
| 3 | "How do you manage your projects?" | "Walk me through how you managed your most recent client project from start to finish." | Rule 2 |

## Learning Goal 1: Do freelancers have project management pain?
Opener: "What does a typical work week look like for you?"
Depth:
- "Tell me about the last time a project got disorganized. What happened?"
- "What are the implications when project details fall through the cracks?"
- "How seriously do you take project organization compared to, say, finding new clients?"
Commitment signal: "Have you looked into any tools or systems to help with this?"

Scenario: Product manager preparing for first customer discovery conversations

Trigger: "We're exploring a new feature for our analytics platform that would auto-generate executive reports. I need to prepare questions for talking to marketing directors. No existing questions yet."

Process:

  1. Identify learning goals: (a) How do marketing directors currently create executive reports? (b) How painful is the current process? (c) Who else is involved in reporting?
  2. Skip audit (no existing questions)
  3. Generate full question script from scratch
  4. Add anti-bias safeguards (flag the risk of pitching the auto-generate feature)

Output (abbreviated):

## Learning Goal 1: Current reporting workflow
Opener: "Tell me about the last executive report you put together."
Depth:
- "Walk me through the steps — where did the data come from, who was involved, how long did it take?"
- "What was the most annoying part of that process?"
- "What happened after you delivered it? Any follow-up requests or revisions?"
Commitment signal: "Have you tried any tools or shortcuts to speed this up?"

> WATCH OUT: Do NOT mention "auto-generated reports" during this section.
> If they mention reporting pain, resist the urge to pitch — instead ask
> "What have you tried to make it faster?"

Scenario: Rewriting a single biased question

Trigger: "Is this a good question to ask potential customers: 'Would you buy an app that helps you track your calories more easily?'"

Process:

  1. Identify the single question violates Rule 1 (about your app) and Rule 2 (hypothetical future)
  2. Rewrite to pass all 3 rules
  3. Provide the rewritten version with explanation

Output:

FAIL — violates Rule 1 (asks about your idea, not their life) and Rule 2 (hypothetical future).

The answer will almost always be "yes" because people are optimistic about
hypotheticals and want to be supportive. This tells you nothing.

Rewritten:
- "How are you tracking what you eat right now?" (their current behavior)
- "Walk me through what you did for food tracking yesterday." (specific past)
- "What else have you tried? What did you like and hate about it?" (commitment signal)
- "How much are you spending on health/nutrition apps right now?" (price anchor from reality)

These questions reveal whether they actually care enough to have tried
solving this — which is far more predictive than whether they say "yes"
to a hypothetical.

Key Principles

  • Opinions are worthless; behavior is everything — People will tell you your idea is great to avoid hurting your feelings. But they cannot fake what they have actually done in the past. Always ask about concrete past actions, never about future intentions or abstract opinions. A question like "Would you use X?" is answered with optimism. "When did you last try to solve X?" is answered with facts.
  • The best questions make your idea invisible — If the person you are talking to does not even know you have a product idea, they cannot lie to you about it. The moment you reveal your concept, every response becomes contaminated by their desire to be supportive (or contrarian). Keep the conversation about their life, their problems, their workflow.
  • Generic claims need anchoring to specifics — When someone says "I always" or "I usually" or "I would," that is a generic claim (vague, non-specific feedback). It sounds like data but it is noise. Anchor it to reality by asking "When was the last time that happened?" or "Can you walk me through a specific example?" The specific story either confirms the generic claim or contradicts it.
  • Every question must serve a learning goal — Questions without a clear purpose produce interesting but useless conversations. Before adding any question to the script, verify: "If they answer this, which of my 3 learning goals does it advance?" Goalless questions waste scarce conversation time.
  • Premature specificity kills discovery — If you zoom into your specific problem area before confirming the person even cares about that area, you get false validation. Start broad ("What are the biggest challenges in your role?") and only zoom in when they independently raise the topic you care about. If they do not mention it unprompted, it is probably not a top priority for them.

References

  • For the complete 14-question good/bad rubric with fix patterns, see question-quality-rubric.md
  • For analyzing conversation quality after conversations happen, use the conversation-data-quality-analyzer skill
  • For prioritizing which questions matter most given business risk, use the question-importance-prioritizer skill

License

This skill is licensed under CC-BY-SA-4.0. Source: BookForge — The Mom Test by Rob Fitzpatrick.

Related BookForge Skills

This skill is standalone. Browse more BookForge skills: bookforge-skills

平台分布

OpenClaw

96.46%
按下载量换算832

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

调用外部服务

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills