converge-cli 0.1.0__tar.gz

converge_cli-0.1.0/.github/skills/ab-test-setup/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,302 @@
+---
+name: "ab-test-setup"
+description: When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
+license: MIT
+metadata:
+  version: 1.0.0
+  author: Alireza Rezvani
+  category: marketing
+  updated: 2026-03-06
+---
+
+# A/B Test Setup
+
+You are an expert in experimentation and A/B testing. Your goal is to help design tests that produce statistically valid, actionable results.
+
+## Initial Assessment
+
+**Check for product marketing context first:**
+If `.claude/product-marketing-context.md` exists, read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
+
+Before designing a test, understand:
+
+1. **Test Context** - What are you trying to improve? What change are you considering?
+2. **Current State** - Baseline conversion rate? Current traffic volume?
+3. **Constraints** - Technical complexity? Timeline? Tools available?
+
+---
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### 1. Start with a Hypothesis
+- Not just "let's see what happens"
+- Specific prediction of outcome
+- Based on reasoning or data
+
+### 2. Test One Thing
+- Single variable per test
+- Otherwise you don't know what worked
+
+### 3. Statistical Rigor
+- Pre-determine sample size
+- Don't peek and stop early
+- Commit to the methodology
+
+### 4. Measure What Matters
+- Primary metric tied to business value
+- Secondary metrics for context
+- Guardrail metrics to prevent harm
+
+---
+
+## Hypothesis Framework
+
+### Structure
+
+```
+Because [observation/data],
+we believe [change]
+will cause [expected outcome]
+for [audience].
+We'll know this is true when [metrics].
+```
+
+### Example
+
+**Weak**: "Changing the button color might increase clicks."
+
+**Strong**: "Because users report difficulty finding the CTA (per heatmaps and feedback), we believe making the button larger and using contrasting color will increase CTA clicks by 15%+ for new visitors. We'll measure click-through rate from page view to signup start."
+
+---
+
+## Test Types
+
+| Type | Description | Traffic Needed |
+|------|-------------|----------------|
+| A/B | Two versions, single change | Moderate |
+| A/B/n | Multiple variants | Higher |
+| MVT | Multiple changes in combinations | Very high |
+| Split URL | Different URLs for variants | Moderate |
+
+---
+
+## Sample Size
+
+### Quick Reference
+
+| Baseline | 10% Lift | 20% Lift | 50% Lift |
+|----------|----------|----------|----------|
+| 1% | 150k/variant | 39k/variant | 6k/variant |
+| 3% | 47k/variant | 12k/variant | 2k/variant |
+| 5% | 27k/variant | 7k/variant | 1.2k/variant |
+| 10% | 12k/variant | 3k/variant | 550/variant |
+
+**Calculators:**
+- [Evan Miller's](https://www.evanmiller.org/ab-testing/sample-size.html)
+- [Optimizely's](https://www.optimizely.com/sample-size-calculator/)
+
+**For detailed sample size tables and duration calculations**: See [references/sample-size-guide.md](references/sample-size-guide.md)
+
+---
+
+## Metrics Selection
+
+### Primary Metric
+- Single metric that matters most
+- Directly tied to hypothesis
+- What you'll use to call the test
+
+### Secondary Metrics
+- Support primary metric interpretation
+- Explain why/how the change worked
+
+### Guardrail Metrics
+- Things that shouldn't get worse
+- Stop test if significantly negative
+
+### Example: Pricing Page Test
+- **Primary**: Plan selection rate
+- **Secondary**: Time on page, plan distribution
+- **Guardrail**: Support tickets, refund rate
+
+---
+
+## Designing Variants
+
+### What to Vary
+
+| Category | Examples |
+|----------|----------|
+| Headlines/Copy | Message angle, value prop, specificity, tone |
+| Visual Design | Layout, color, images, hierarchy |
+| CTA | Button copy, size, placement, number |
+| Content | Information included, order, amount, social proof |
+
+### Best Practices
+- Single, meaningful change
+- Bold enough to make a difference
+- True to the hypothesis
+
+---
+
+## Traffic Allocation
+
+| Approach | Split | When to Use |
+|----------|-------|-------------|
+| Standard | 50/50 | Default for A/B |
+| Conservative | 90/10, 80/20 | Limit risk of bad variant |
+| Ramping | Start small, increase | Technical risk mitigation |
+
+**Considerations:**
+- Consistency: Users see same variant on return
+- Balanced exposure across time of day/week
+
+---
+
+## Implementation
+
+### Client-Side
+- JavaScript modifies page after load
+- Quick to implement, can cause flicker
+- Tools: PostHog, Optimizely, VWO
+
+### Server-Side
+- Variant determined before render
+- No flicker, requires dev work
+- Tools: PostHog, LaunchDarkly, Split
+
+---
+
+## Running the Test
+
+### Pre-Launch Checklist
+- [ ] Hypothesis documented
+- [ ] Primary metric defined
+- [ ] Sample size calculated
+- [ ] Variants implemented correctly
+- [ ] Tracking verified
+- [ ] QA completed on all variants
+
+### During the Test
+
+**DO:**
+- Monitor for technical issues
+- Check segment quality
+- Document external factors
+
+**DON'T:**
+- Peek at results and stop early
+- Make changes to variants
+- Add traffic from new sources
+
+### The Peeking Problem
+Looking at results before reaching sample size and stopping early leads to false positives and wrong decisions. Pre-commit to sample size and trust the process.
+
+---
+
+## Analyzing Results
+
+### Statistical Significance
+- 95% confidence = p-value < 0.05
+- Means <5% chance result is random
+- Not a guarantee—just a threshold
+
+### Analysis Checklist
+
+1. **Reach sample size?** If not, result is preliminary
+2. **Statistically significant?** Check confidence intervals
+3. **Effect size meaningful?** Compare to MDE, project impact
+4. **Secondary metrics consistent?** Support the primary?
+5. **Guardrail concerns?** Anything get worse?
+6. **Segment differences?** Mobile vs. desktop? New vs. returning?
+
+### Interpreting Results
+
+| Result | Conclusion |
+|--------|------------|
+| Significant winner | Implement variant |
+| Significant loser | Keep control, learn why |
+| No significant difference | Need more traffic or bolder test |
+| Mixed signals | Dig deeper, maybe segment |
+
+---
+
+## Documentation
+
+Document every test with:
+- Hypothesis
+- Variants (with screenshots)
+- Results (sample, metrics, significance)
+- Decision and learnings
+
+**For templates**: See [references/test-templates.md](references/test-templates.md)
+
+---
+
+## Common Mistakes
+
+### Test Design
+- Testing too small a change (undetectable)
+- Testing too many things (can't isolate)
+- No clear hypothesis
+
+### Execution
+- Stopping early
+- Changing things mid-test
+- Not checking implementation
+
+### Analysis
+- Ignoring confidence intervals
+- Cherry-picking segments
+- Over-interpreting inconclusive results
+
+---
+
+## Task-Specific Questions
+
+1. What's your current conversion rate?
+2. How much traffic does this page get?
+3. What change are you considering and why?
+4. What's the smallest improvement worth detecting?
+5. What tools do you have for testing?
+6. Have you tested this area before?
+
+---
+
+## Proactive Triggers
+
+Proactively offer A/B test design when:
+
+1. **Conversion rate mentioned** — User shares a conversion rate and asks how to improve it; suggest designing a test rather than guessing at solutions.
+2. **Copy or design decision is unclear** — When two variants of a headline, CTA, or layout are being debated, propose testing instead of opinionating.
+3. **Campaign underperformance** — User reports a landing page or email performing below expectations; offer a structured test plan.
+4. **Pricing page discussion** — Any mention of pricing page changes should trigger an offer to design a pricing test with guardrail metrics.
+5. **Post-launch review** — After a feature or campaign goes live, propose follow-up experiments to optimize the result.
+
+---
+
+## Output Artifacts
+
+| Artifact | Format | Description |
+|----------|--------|-------------|
+| Experiment Brief | Markdown doc | Hypothesis, variants, metrics, sample size, duration, owner |
+| Sample Size Calculator Input | Table | Baseline rate, MDE, confidence level, power |
+| Pre-Launch QA Checklist | Checklist | Implementation, tracking, variant rendering verification |
+| Results Analysis Report | Markdown doc | Statistical significance, effect size, segment breakdown, decision |
+| Test Backlog | Prioritized list | Ranked experiments by expected impact and feasibility |
+
+---
+
+## Communication
+
+All outputs should meet the quality standard: clear hypothesis, pre-registered metrics, and documented decisions. Avoid presenting inconclusive results as wins. Every test should produce a learning, even if the variant loses. Reference `marketing-context` for product and audience framing before designing experiments.
+
+---
+
+## Related Skills
+
+- **page-cro** — USE when you need ideas for *what* to test; NOT when you already have a hypothesis and just need test design.
+- **analytics-tracking** — USE to set up measurement infrastructure before running tests; NOT as a substitute for defining primary metrics upfront.
+- **campaign-analytics** — USE after tests conclude to fold results into broader campaign attribution; NOT during the test itself.
+- **pricing-strategy** — USE when test results affect pricing decisions; NOT to replace a controlled test with pure strategic reasoning.
+- **marketing-context** — USE as foundation before any test design to ensure hypotheses align with ICP and positioning; always load first.

converge_cli-0.1.0/.github/skills/ab-test-setup/references/sample-size-guide.md

@@ -0,0 +1,252 @@
+# Sample Size Guide
+
+Reference for calculating sample sizes and test duration.
+
+## Sample Size Fundamentals
+
+### Required Inputs
+
+1. **Baseline conversion rate**: Your current rate
+2. **Minimum detectable effect (MDE)**: Smallest change worth detecting
+3. **Statistical significance level**: Usually 95% (α = 0.05)
+4. **Statistical power**: Usually 80% (β = 0.20)
+
+### What These Mean
+
+**Baseline conversion rate**: If your page converts at 5%, that's your baseline.
+
+**MDE (Minimum Detectable Effect)**: The smallest improvement you care about detecting. Set this based on:
+- Business impact (is a 5% lift meaningful?)
+- Implementation cost (worth the effort?)
+- Realistic expectations (what have past tests shown?)
+
+**Statistical significance (95%)**: Means there's less than 5% chance the observed difference is due to random chance.
+
+**Statistical power (80%)**: Means if there's a real effect of size MDE, you have 80% chance of detecting it.
+
+---
+
+## Sample Size Quick Reference Tables
+
+### Conversion Rate: 1%
+
+| Lift to Detect | Sample per Variant | Total Sample |
+|----------------|-------------------|--------------|
+| 5% (1% → 1.05%) | 1,500,000 | 3,000,000 |
+| 10% (1% → 1.1%) | 380,000 | 760,000 |
+| 20% (1% → 1.2%) | 97,000 | 194,000 |
+| 50% (1% → 1.5%) | 16,000 | 32,000 |
+| 100% (1% → 2%) | 4,200 | 8,400 |
+
+### Conversion Rate: 3%
+
+| Lift to Detect | Sample per Variant | Total Sample |
+|----------------|-------------------|--------------|
+| 5% (3% → 3.15%) | 480,000 | 960,000 |
+| 10% (3% → 3.3%) | 120,000 | 240,000 |
+| 20% (3% → 3.6%) | 31,000 | 62,000 |
+| 50% (3% → 4.5%) | 5,200 | 10,400 |
+| 100% (3% → 6%) | 1,400 | 2,800 |
+
+### Conversion Rate: 5%
+
+| Lift to Detect | Sample per Variant | Total Sample |
+|----------------|-------------------|--------------|
+| 5% (5% → 5.25%) | 280,000 | 560,000 |
+| 10% (5% → 5.5%) | 72,000 | 144,000 |
+| 20% (5% → 6%) | 18,000 | 36,000 |
+| 50% (5% → 7.5%) | 3,100 | 6,200 |
+| 100% (5% → 10%) | 810 | 1,620 |
+
+### Conversion Rate: 10%
+
+| Lift to Detect | Sample per Variant | Total Sample |
+|----------------|-------------------|--------------|
+| 5% (10% → 10.5%) | 130,000 | 260,000 |
+| 10% (10% → 11%) | 34,000 | 68,000 |
+| 20% (10% → 12%) | 8,700 | 17,400 |
+| 50% (10% → 15%) | 1,500 | 3,000 |
+| 100% (10% → 20%) | 400 | 800 |
+
+### Conversion Rate: 20%
+
+| Lift to Detect | Sample per Variant | Total Sample |
+|----------------|-------------------|--------------|
+| 5% (20% → 21%) | 60,000 | 120,000 |
+| 10% (20% → 22%) | 16,000 | 32,000 |
+| 20% (20% → 24%) | 4,000 | 8,000 |
+| 50% (20% → 30%) | 700 | 1,400 |
+| 100% (20% → 40%) | 200 | 400 |
+
+---
+
+## Duration Calculator
+
+### Formula
+
+```
+Duration (days) = (Sample per variant × Number of variants) / (Daily traffic × % exposed)
+```
+
+### Examples
+
+**Scenario 1: High-traffic page**
+- Need: 10,000 per variant (2 variants = 20,000 total)
+- Daily traffic: 5,000 visitors
+- 100% exposed to test
+- Duration: 20,000 / 5,000 = **4 days**
+
+**Scenario 2: Medium-traffic page**
+- Need: 30,000 per variant (60,000 total)
+- Daily traffic: 2,000 visitors
+- 100% exposed
+- Duration: 60,000 / 2,000 = **30 days**
+
+**Scenario 3: Low-traffic with partial exposure**
+- Need: 15,000 per variant (30,000 total)
+- Daily traffic: 500 visitors
+- 50% exposed to test
+- Effective daily: 250
+- Duration: 30,000 / 250 = **120 days** (too long!)
+
+### Minimum Duration Rules
+
+Even with sufficient sample size, run tests for at least:
+- **1 full week**: To capture day-of-week variation
+- **2 business cycles**: If B2B (weekday vs. weekend patterns)
+- **Through paydays**: If e-commerce (beginning/end of month)
+
+### Maximum Duration Guidelines
+
+Avoid running tests longer than 4-8 weeks:
+- Novelty effects wear off
+- External factors intervene
+- Opportunity cost of other tests
+
+---
+
+## Online Calculators
+
+### Recommended Tools
+
+**Evan Miller's Calculator**
+https://www.evanmiller.org/ab-testing/sample-size.html
+- Simple interface
+- Bookmark-worthy
+
+**Optimizely's Calculator**
+https://www.optimizely.com/sample-size-calculator/
+- Business-friendly language
+- Duration estimates
+
+**AB Test Guide Calculator**
+https://www.abtestguide.com/calc/
+- Includes Bayesian option
+- Multiple test types
+
+**VWO Duration Calculator**
+https://vwo.com/tools/ab-test-duration-calculator/
+- Duration-focused
+- Good for planning
+
+---
+
+## Adjusting for Multiple Variants
+
+With more than 2 variants (A/B/n tests), you need more sample:
+
+| Variants | Multiplier |
+|----------|------------|
+| 2 (A/B) | 1x |
+| 3 (A/B/C) | ~1.5x |
+| 4 (A/B/C/D) | ~2x |
+| 5+ | Consider reducing variants |
+
+**Why?** More comparisons increase chance of false positives. You're comparing:
+- A vs B
+- A vs C
+- B vs C (sometimes)
+
+Apply Bonferroni correction or use tools that handle this automatically.
+
+---
+
+## Common Sample Size Mistakes
+
+### 1. Underpowered tests
+**Problem**: Not enough sample to detect realistic effects
+**Fix**: Be realistic about MDE, get more traffic, or don't test
+
+### 2. Overpowered tests
+**Problem**: Waiting for sample size when you already have significance
+**Fix**: This is actually fine—you committed to sample size, honor it
+
+### 3. Wrong baseline rate
+**Problem**: Using wrong conversion rate for calculation
+**Fix**: Use the specific metric and page, not site-wide averages
+
+### 4. Ignoring segments
+**Problem**: Calculating for full traffic, then analyzing segments
+**Fix**: If you plan segment analysis, calculate sample for smallest segment
+
+### 5. Testing too many things
+**Problem**: Dividing traffic too many ways
+**Fix**: Prioritize ruthlessly, run fewer concurrent tests
+
+---
+
+## When Sample Size Requirements Are Too High
+
+Options when you can't get enough traffic:
+
+1. **Increase MDE**: Accept only detecting larger effects (20%+ lift)
+2. **Lower confidence**: Use 90% instead of 95% (risky, document it)
+3. **Reduce variants**: Test only the most promising variant
+4. **Combine traffic**: Test across multiple similar pages
+5. **Test upstream**: Test earlier in funnel where traffic is higher
+6. **Don't test**: Make decision based on qualitative data instead
+7. **Longer test**: Accept longer duration (weeks/months)
+
+---
+
+## Sequential Testing
+
+If you must check results before reaching sample size:
+
+### What is it?
+Statistical method that adjusts for multiple looks at data.
+
+### When to use
+- High-risk changes
+- Need to stop bad variants early
+- Time-sensitive decisions
+
+### Tools that support it
+- Optimizely (Stats Accelerator)
+- VWO (SmartStats)
+- PostHog (Bayesian approach)
+
+### Tradeoff
+- More flexibility to stop early
+- Slightly larger sample size requirement
+- More complex analysis
+
+---
+
+## Quick Decision Framework
+
+### Can I run this test?
+
+```
+Daily traffic to page: _____
+Baseline conversion rate: _____
+MDE I care about: _____
+
+Sample needed per variant: _____ (from tables above)
+Days to run: Sample / Daily traffic = _____
+
+If days > 60: Consider alternatives
+If days > 30: Acceptable for high-impact tests
+If days < 14: Likely feasible
+If days < 7: Easy to run, consider running longer anyway
+```