hypothesis
/hypothesis
Pisze testowalne hipotezy produktowe z metrykami sukcesu, wartością bazową, celem i terminem oraz planem walidacji i regułami decyzji po uzyskaniu wyniku.
- Autor
- tarunccet ↗
- Repozytorium
- pm-skills ↗
- Licencja
- MIT
- Ostatnia zmiana repozytorium
- 23.08.2026
Ocena i bezpieczeństwo
- Pliki w paczce
- 1
- Skrypty
- 0
- Komentarze HTML
- 0
- Adresy URL w SKILL.md
- 0
Brak sygnałów. Repozytorium zmienione 23.08.2026, bez odwołań do wycofanych modeli i API.
MIT, otwarta: można używać i zmieniać, z zachowaniem informacji o autorze.
Co robi i kiedy
Pisze testowalne hipotezy produktowe z metrykami sukcesu, wartością bazową, celem i terminem oraz planem walidacji i regułami decyzji po uzyskaniu wyniku.
Oryginalny opis (EN)
Write testable product hypotheses with clear success metrics, baselines, targets, and timeframes. Produces a structured hypothesis statement, supporting evidence, a validation plan with method and sample size, and a decision framework for what to do if validated or invalidated. Use when validating product assumptions, before running experiments, when proposing new features, or when shifting from opinion-based to evidence-based decision making.
Jak działa
- Purpose
- Domain Context
- Context
- Instructions
- Output Format
- Notes
Podgląd SKILL.md
--- name: hypothesis description: "Write testable product hypotheses with clear success metrics, baselines, targets, and timeframes. Produces a structured hypothesis statement, supporting evidence, a validation plan with method and sample size, and a decision framework for what to do if validated or invalidated. Use when validating product assumptions, before running experiments, when proposing new features, or when shifting from opinion-based to evidence-based decision making." --- # Hypothesis: Testable Beliefs with Success Metrics ## Purpose You are an experienced product manager helping a team write a testable hypothesis for **$ARGUMENTS**. A well-formed hypothesis turns opinions into experiments — it forces clarity about what we believe, why we believe it, and exactly how we'll know if we're right or wrong. ## Domain Context Hypotheses sit between problem definition and experimentation in the discovery workflow. In a lean/agile product organization, every feature bet should start as a hypothesis — a falsifiable statement that can be validated cheaply before the team commits significant engineering effort. Teresa Torres's Continuous Discovery framework and Eric Ries's Lean Startup both depend on disciplined hypothesis writing. A strong hypothesis follows this structure: > "We believe that **[action/change]** for **[user segment]** will result in **[expected outcome]**, as measured by **[metric]** changing from **[baseline]** to **[target]** within **[timeframe]**." This skill pairs well with **brainstorm-experiments-existing** and **brainstorm-experiments-new** for designing the actual experiment, and with **problem-statement** for grounding the hypothesis in a validated problem. ### What You'll Need | Input | Required? | Example | |-------|-----------|---------| | Feature idea, assumption, or belief to test | ✅ Required | "Adding onboarding tooltips will improve activation" | | Target user segment | ✅ Required | Free-tier users in their first 7 days | | Current baseline metric (if known) | 🟡 Recommended | "Current activation rate is 34%" | | Problem statement or context | 🟡 Recommended | Link to problem statement, PRD, or research | | Constraints (time, budget, resources) | ⚪ Optional | "Must validate within 2 sprints" | > **Don't have everything?** Start anyway — the skill will help you identify what baseline data you need and where to find it. ## Context You are writing a testable hypothesis for **$ARGUMENTS**. If the user provides files (problem statements, experiment results, analytics data, or product briefs), read them first to ground the hypothesis in existing evidence. ## Instructions ### Phase 0: Context Confirmation Before proceeding, review what's been provided in $ARGUMENTS and the conversation context. **Only ask about what's missing — don't re-ask what's already clear.** 1. **Summarize** what you understand from the provided context — restate the product, feature, or situation back to the user in 2-3 sentences. 2. **Identify gaps** — if any of the following are unclear, ask: - What belief or assumption are we formalizing into a hypothesis? - What evidence or observation prompted this hypothesis? - What metric or outcome would validate or invalidate it? 3. **Confirm**: _"Here's my understanding: [summary]. I plan to [brief description of what the skill will produce]. Does this look right, or would you like to adjust anything before I proceed?"_ If the user provides additional context, incorporate it. If the user confirms, proceed. 1. **Define the belief clearly**: - What specific action or change do we believe will create an outcome? - Separate the **intervention** (what we'll do) from the **mechanism** (why we think it works) from the **outcome** (what we expect to happen). - A hypothesis must be falsifiable — if there's no way to prove it wrong, it's not a hypothesis. 2. **Identify the user segment**: - Who specifically will be affected by this change? - Be precise enough to target an experiment: not "users" but "free-tier users who signed up in the last 7 days and have not completed onboarding." - If the segment is too broad, suggest how to narrow it. 3. **Specify the measurable outcome**: - What metric will change if the hypothesis is true? - Choose a **leading indicator** that moves quickly, not a lagging metric that takes months. - The metric should be directly influenced by the intervention — avoid metrics with too many confounding variables. 4. **Set baseline and target**: - **Baseline**: What is the current value of the metric? If unknown, describe how to measure it before the experiment starts. - **Target**: What value would confirm the hypothesis? Be specific — "improve" is not a target; "increase from 34% to 42%" is. - Ensure the target is meaningful — a statistically significant but business-irrelevant change isn't worth celebrating. 5. **Define the timeframe**: - How long will the experiment run? - Consider: time to reach statistical significance, business cycles, and competing initiatives. - Set a hard end date — experiments that run forever generate no decisions. 6. **Identify risks and assumptions**: - What assumptions underlie this hypothesis? (e.g., "Users notice the tooltip," "The metric is correctly instrumented") - Which of these are the riskiest — most uncertain and most consequential? - Use the **Assumption Risk Matrix**: plot each assumption on Uncertainty (high/low) × Impact (high/low). Focus validation on high-uncertainty, high-impact assumptions first. 7. **Design the validation approach**: - Recommend an experiment type: A/B test, fake door test, prototype test, survey, concierge MVP, Wizard of Oz, or other. - Estimate sample size needed for statistical significance. - Define both **success criteria** (what confirms the hypothesis) and **fail criteria** (what disproves it). - Include an **inconclusive zone** — what happens if results are ambiguous. ## Output Format ``` ## Hypothesis: [Short Title] ### Hypothesis Statement We believe that [action/change] for [user segment] will result in [expected outcome], as measured by [metric] changing from [baseline] to [target] within [timeframe]. ### Why We Believe This - **Mechanism**: [Why we think this intervention leads to this outcome] - **Supporting evidence**: [Data, research, analogies, or patterns that support the belief] - **Confidence level**: High / Medium / Low ### Assumption Risk Matrix | Assumption | Uncertainty | Impact | Priority | |-----------|-------------|--------|----------| | [Assumption 1] | High/Low | High/Low | Test first / Monitor / Accept | ### Validation Plan - **Method**: [A/B test, fake door, prototype, survey, etc.] - **Sample size**: [Estimated participants needed] - **Duration**: [How long the experiment will run] - **Success criteria**: [Specific threshold that confirms the hypothesis] - **Fail criteria**: [Specific threshold that disproves the hypothesis] - **Inconclusive criteria**: [What happens if results fall between success and fail] ### Decision Framework | Result | Action | |--------|--------| | ✅ Validated | [Next step — build, scale, write PRD, etc.] | | ❌ Invalidated | [Next step — pivot, reframe, kill, or dig deeper] | | ⚠️ Inconclusive | [Next step — extend experiment, refine hypothesis, gather more data] | ### Related Hypotheses - [Other hypotheses that depend on or conflict with this one] ``` Save as markdown: `Hypothesis-[topic]-[date].md` ## Notes - A hypothesis is not a wish — "We hope users love it" is not testable. Be rigorous about measurability. - Start with the riskiest assumption, not the easiest one to test. Cheap validation of low-risk assumptions feels productive but doesn't reduce uncertainty. - One hypothesis per experiment. Bundling multiple changes makes it impossible to attribute results. - Time-box every experiment. If you haven't reached significance, make a judgment call and move on — perfect data is the enemy of timely decisions. - Invalidated hypotheses are valuable — they prevent the team from building the wrong thing. Celebrate learning, not just confirmation. ---
Wersje
W bazie nie ma innych skilli o nazwie hypothesis.
Migawka bazy z 28.10.2026 · wersja paczki 86a880d0005c (skrót SHA-256 całej paczki)
Pobrania w ostatnich 30 dniach: 0 · ranking
Zgłoś problem z tym skillem: szkodliwa treść, błędny opis albo prośba autora o usunięcie.
Podobne skille
- 100hypothesis-design
Formułuje jasne, testowalne hipotezy do eksperymentów produktowych, aby zwalidować proponowane rozwiązania. - 100hypotheses
Prowadzi listę hipotez projektu: dodaje nowe, doprecyzowuje istniejące, aktualizuje status na podstawie zebranych dowodów i ocenia ogólny stan walidacji założeń. - 100meta-experiment-design
Planuje eksperymenty produktowe: testowalne hipotezy, wielkość próby, priorytetyzacja testów i obronna ocena wyników. - 100validation-plan
Przygotowuje plan walidacji rekomendacji, hipotezy lub decyzji: dowody, testy, bramki decyzyjne i kryteria kontynuuj, dostosuj lub zatrzymaj. - 90product-experimentation
Projektuje i waliduje ograniczone eksperymenty produktowe z falsyfikowalnymi hipotezami, wcześniej ustalonymi progami, metrykami ochronnymi, kryteriami kwalifikacji i regułami zatrzymania. - 100hypotheses
Zarządza testowalnymi hipotezami projektu: zgłasza nowe, doprecyzowuje istniejące, aktualizuje status, przegląda cały zestaw i ocenia stan na podstawie zebranych dowodów, na przykład przy przygotowaniu wywiadów.