L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Développement · SKILL.md

iterate-gtm-weekly

iterate-gtm-weekly

Weekly go-to-market review for a shipped product: funnel by source, activation cohort, top drop-off, launch results, then one experiment and one post, scorecard row appended. Use when "weekly growth review", "what should we do this week for growth", "GTM check-in". Production bugs → iterate-post-launch.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: iterate-gtm-weekly description: > Weekly go-to-market review for a shipped product: funnel by source, activation cohort, top drop-off, launch results, then one experiment and one post, scorecard row appended. Use when "weekly growth review", "what should we do this week for growth", "GTM check-in". Production bugs → iterate-post-launch. license: MIT disable-model-invocation: true

iterate-gtm-weekly — One number, one fix, one post

Degree of freedom: MIXED. Which lever to pull [HIGH freedom]; the five-line review, the single-experiment rule, and the scorecard update [LOW freedom — run exactly].

The loop after workflow-gtm. Thirty minutes a week: read what the funnel did, name the one step that lost the most, ship one experiment against it, publish one thing, write it down. iterate-post-launch owns production defects; this owns growth.

This skill vs neighbors

SkillOwns
iterate-gtm-weekly (this)Weekly funnel read → one experiment → one post → scorecard
iterate-post-launchSentry / production signals → fix
workflow-gtmThe initial plan-to-apply run this loop follows
audit-analyticsWhen a funnel cell is blind, add the event first
docs-launch-kitThe post, when it is a launch
workflow-feedback-to-closureTurning user feedback into tickets

Do not fire for "errors spiked in production" → iterate-post-launch.

How to reason

  1. Read — the six funnel cells by source for the last 7 days vs the prior 7
  2. Locate — the single step with the largest absolute loss (not the smallest percentage)
  3. Attribute — did last week's experiment or post move anything; say so with the number
  4. Choose — one experiment on the losing step, one post, both small enough for this week
  5. Record — scorecard row appended; next review scheduled

Worked example

Read: visits 4,120 (+9%), signups 310 (−4%), activated 71 (23%, flat), paid 6, refer 2; Show HN source dried up, organic docs traffic up. Locate: signup → activated loses 239 users; visit → signup lost 22 more than last week but far fewer in absolute terms. Attribute: last week's hero rewrite: visit→signup 7.9% → 7.5% — no lift; keep for one more week (sample small). Choose: experiment — pre-fill the workspace with sample data for the "explore" JTBD answer (enhance-onboarding); post — a short comparison page announcement. Record: row appended to plan-gtm.md scorecard; review next Monday.

Self-critique before reporting

  • Five lines — the review fits: funnel by source · activation cohort · top drop-off · last experiment result · one post
  • One experiment — exactly one, with a metric and a stop date; a second becomes next week's
  • Attributed — last week's change has a number beside it, even if "no change" or "unmeasured"
  • Recorded — scorecard row appended in plan-gtm.md (or the file workflow-gtm produced)
  • Right owner — production errors → iterate-post-launch; new events → audit-analytics

Procedure [LOW freedom — run exactly]

  1. Pull numbers — analytics dashboard or export for Visit → Signup → Activated → Habit → Paid → Refer, by utm_source / referrer, this week vs last. Blind cell → write unmeasured and file the event with audit-analytics as this week's experiment if it is the losing step.
  2. Launch results — fill any docs/launch/*.md Results table older than 7 days.
  3. Locate the loss — absolute users lost per step; pick the largest.
  4. Attribute — last week's experiment: metric before / after; keep, revert, or extend.
  5. Choose — one experiment (owner skill named) + one post (channel named).
  6. Write the row and schedule next week.

Levers by losing step [HIGH freedom]

Losing stepFirst leversSkill
Visit → Signuphero five-second test, CTA verb, "no card" line, ungated tryenhance-web-conversion
Signup → Activatedcut a field, sample data, checklist end = activation, day-1 nudgeenhance-onboarding, enhance-lifecycle-email
Activated → Habitday-3/7 nudges, saved-state reminder, second ahaenhance-lifecycle-email
Habit → Paidlimit-moment prompt, price shown, annual toggle wordingenhance-web-conversion, plan-pricing
Paid → Referbadge, share artifact, referral credit on activationenhance-growth-loops
Visits themselvesone comparison page, one launch post, registry listingdocs-comparison-pages, docs-launch-kit, audit-registry-listing

Scorecard row [LOW freedom — shape]

| Week | Visit | Signup | Activated | Habit | Paid | Refer | Top loss | Experiment (metric, stop date) | Post | Last week's result |

Guardrails

  • One experiment. Two changes on one step make attribution impossible.
  • Absolute loss, not percentage. A 90% drop on 10 users is not the priority.
  • Numbers or "unmeasured". No estimates presented as measurements.
  • Thirty minutes. If the review grows, the instrumentation is the problem — file it.

Chains with

  • workflow-gtm → produces the scorecard this loop appends to.
  • audit-analytics → blind cells.
  • enhance-onboarding, enhance-web-conversion, enhance-lifecycle-email, enhance-growth-loops, docs-comparison-pages, docs-launch-kit → the levers.
Skills enregistrées