executing-plans
executing-plans
Use when executing an implementation plan in the current session as the implementer yourself — your human partner chose inline execution, or no subagent tool is available
metrics-frameworkBuild a metrics framework for any product, team, or business. Use when asked for a metrics tree, KPI framework, North Star metric, AARRR funnel, HEART framework, or OKR metrics. Produces a structured metrics hierarchy from North Star down to leading indicators, with measurement guidance.
Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs
This skill builds a complete metrics framework tailored to a product or business. It connects the North Star metric to actionable leading indicators, making it clear which metrics to track, which to optimise, and how they relate to each other.
Work from what is given. If any of these is missing, still produce the complete output: fill each gap with a reasonable assumption marked (assumed, confirm) and list those assumptions at the end. Ask a question first only when the core subject itself is missing (there is nothing to write about).
If no framework preference is given, recommend the best fit based on stage and business model.
If a professional-brain (brain/) exists, use it before asking:
context.md for the metric definitions the org already agreed on (reuse them — don't silently redefine a metric) and knowledge/strategy.md for what the business is optimising for.knowledge/, and any target-setting decision to decisions/, each provenance-tagged so a [hunch] target isn't treated as a committed goal.Explain in 2–3 sentences why you're recommending this framework for their context.
[Metric Name]: [Definition — exactly what is measured and how]
Why this is the right North Star for this business: [2–3 sentences. It should reflect customer value delivered, not just revenue or activity. Explain what behaviour it captures and why maximising it correlates with long-term business health.]
How to measure it: [Formula or data source] Current baseline: [Leave as [ADD BASELINE] for user to fill] Target: [Leave as [ADD TARGET] for user to fill]
Show how supporting metrics roll up to the North Star. Format as a hierarchy:
[North Star Metric]
├── [Driver 1: e.g. Acquisition]
│ ├── [L2 metric: e.g. Organic signups / week]
│ └── [L2 metric: e.g. Paid CAC by channel]
├── [Driver 2: e.g. Activation]
│ ├── [L2 metric: e.g. % users completing onboarding within 7 days]
│ └── [L2 metric: e.g. Time to first value action]
└── [Driver 3: e.g. Retention]
├── [L2 metric: e.g. Day 30 retention rate]
└── [L2 metric: e.g. Feature adoption depth]
For each L2 metric, provide:
[2–3 metrics to watch that prevent optimising the North Star in ways that damage the business. E.g. "If we optimise for signups, we need to watch spam account rate. If we optimise for engagement, we need to watch support ticket volume."]
Suggest a 3-tier dashboard structure:
[5 questions the team should ask in their weekly metrics review to turn numbers into insights. e.g. "Is our activation rate improving while retention stays flat? That suggests onboarding quality issue, not a product-market fit problem."]
This skill ships with support files — use them when they are available:
references/metric-tree-craft.md — Metric Trees That Drive Decisions (Not Dashboards). Apply it while producing the output; it carries the calibration and judgment calls the method summary above compresses.templates/metric-tree.md — a fill-in version of the deliverable with the quality gates inline. Offer it when the user wants to work the document themselves rather than have it generated.Score any output of this skill before handing it over; 32+ is ship-quality.
| Dimension | 0 | 5 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|
| North Star validity | North Star is business activity (GMV, revenue, pageviews) or vanity volume | North Star gestures at customer value but its definition leaves edge cases (cancellations, disputes, refunds) uncounted | North Star counts value actually delivered to the customer, with edge cases resolved in the definition and rejected alternatives named with reasons |
| Tree causal integrity | L2 metrics are a flat KPI list with no causal link to the North Star; drivers overlap or are all one category | Drivers distinct, but some L2 metrics correlate with rather than drive the North Star, or leading/lagging labels are guesses | 3–4 distinct drivers where moving any L2 metric plausibly moves the North Star, with honest leading/lagging labels — including admitting the goal metric is lagging when it is |
| Definition precision | Metrics named without formula, data source, or time window | Most metrics have formulas, but at least one would be computed differently by two reasonable analysts | Every metric specifies formula, source table or event, and window precisely enough that two analysts get the same number |
| Gaming resistance | No counter-metrics; every metric assumed to be optimised in good faith | Generic counter-metrics listed but not paired to the specific metric they guard | Each optimisable metric is paired with a counter-metric that names the exact perverse move it catches (accept-then-cancel, discount-bought retention, ghost supply) |