Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

brainstorm-experiments(头脑风暴实验)

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。

brainstorm-experiments 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,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 39,094。

总安装 1,467周安装 63GitHub Stars 103下载 514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
unknown

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

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。

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。

来源仓库内路径:skills/brainstorm-experiments

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 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;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 npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill brainstorm-exper…;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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

brainstorm-experiments 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/borghei/claude-skills --skill brainstorm-experiments。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

brainstorm-experiments 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。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。

brainstorm-experiments 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。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。

brainstorm-experiments 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

brainstorm-experiments 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,467 次,近一周安装 63 次,下载 514 次,GitHub 103 星。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。

brainstorm-experiments 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

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 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 Codex,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。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 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
brainstorm-experiments

头脑风暴实验 · 本页

1,467103只读未明确通过

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

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)

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。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