AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Ab Test Analyze

skill-gokulb20-crewm8-social-media-manager-skill-graph-ab-test-analyze · by gokulb20

Analyze A/B tests across hook variations, posting times, content formats, and CTAs — declare statistical winners, document learnings, and build an always-on optimization engine.

No reviews yet
0 installs
17 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-gokulb20-crewm8-social-media-manager-skill-graph-ab-test-analyze

✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-gokulb20-crewm8-social-media-manager-skill-graph-ab-test-analyze)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
3mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Ab Test Analyze? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

A/B Test Analyze

Structure, run, and analyze A/B tests on social content to determine what actually drives better performance. Social media optimization without experimentation is superstition. This skill turns "I think this works" into "this works, and here's the data."

Purpose

Every content decision is a guess until you test it. Hook variation A vs B, thread format vs short post, morning posting vs afternoon — this skill takes the guesswork out by running controlled experiments and declaring clear winners.

When to Use

  • Testing hook variations for the same content
  • Testing posting times
  • Testing formats (thread vs short post vs carousel)
  • Testing CTAs
  • After 2+ weeks with controlled variations

Inputs Required

  • Test hypothesis: "We believe [change] will improve [metric] by [X]%"
  • Control condition description
  • Variant condition description
  • Result data (from metrics-track)

Quick Reference

| Test Type | Control | Variant | Min Sample | Duration | |-----------|---------|---------|-----------|---------| | Hook A/B | Current hook style | New hook, same body | 2 per condition, same day of week, different weeks | 2 weeks | | Time A/B | Current best time | Alternative time | 2 per condition | 2 weeks | | Format A/B | Current format | Different format, same message | 2 per condition | 2 weeks | | CTA A/B | Current CTA | Different CTA, same post | 2 per condition | 2 weeks |

Procedure

  1. Define hypothesis clearly:
  • "We believe [change] will improve [specific metric] by [X]%"
  • Example: "We believe leading with a statistic instead of a question will improve ER by 15%"
  • Bad hypothesis: "See what works better" (too vague)
  1. Design the test:
  • Independent variable: what you're changing
  • Dependent variable: what you're measuring
  • Control: current version
  • Variant: new version
  • Controlled factors: same platform, day of week, topic weight
  1. Run minimum duration:
  • Single-week tests unreliable (algorithm luck)
  • Min: 2 variations per condition over 2 weeks (4 data points per condition)
  • Never run two A/B tests simultaneously on the same platform (variable contamination)
  1. Analyze results:
  • Average performance for control vs variant
  • Calculate % difference
  • Assess significance: >20% difference = significant; 10-20% = directional; 20%
  • Directional: 10-20% — worth re-testing
  • Tie/conclusive: <10% — keep control
  • Loser: revert, document why
  1. Document learning: What was tested, result, what to change, what to test next.

Output Format

# A/B Test: [Test Name]

## Design
**Hypothesis:** [Specific prediction]
**Variable:** [What changed]
**Metric:** [What was measured]
**Control:** [Condition]
**Variant:** [Condition]
**Platform:** [X / LinkedIn / IG / TikTok]
**Duration:** [Start to end]
**Sample:** [N posts per condition]

## Results
| Condition | Avg [Metric] | vs Control |
|-----------|-------------|------------|
| Control | [N] | — |
| Variant | [N] | [+/-N]% |

**Winner:** [Control / Variant / Inconclusive]

## Analysis
**What happened:** [Plain-English summary]
**Why:** [Theory]
**Confidence:** [High / Medium / Low]

## Decision & Next Steps
**Action:** [Adopt / Keep / Re-test]
**Implementation:** [What changes to make]
**Next test:** [What to test next]

Done Criteria

The skill is complete when:

  1. Hypothesis is specific and measurable
  2. Test was designed with proper controls
  3. Minimum sample size was met (4+ data points per condition)
  4. Winner is declared with confidence assessment
  5. Learning is documented for the always-on learnings doc

Pitfalls

  • Declaring winner from 1 data point per condition (anecdote, not test)
  • Changing multiple variables at once (can't attribute result)
  • Testing during abnormal weeks (holiday, launch, crisis)
  • Cherry-picking data (confirmation bias)

Verification

Would you bet $1,000 of the founder's money on this result being reproducible? If not, don't change strategy based on it yet.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet, be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.