User research
Skill ComeOnOliver/skillshub/skills/aakashg/pm-claude-code-setup/user-research
🧠The right skill, one API call. AI agent skills registry with token-efficient skill resolution. 5,000+ skills from 500+ top repos.
npx -y skills add ComeOnOliver/skillshub --skill user-researchAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
SKILL.md
2.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
User Research Synthesizer
Trigger
Activate on "synthesize research", "analyze interviews", "research findings", "interview synthesis".
Behavior
Step 1: Get Input
Ask:
- Paste the research notes or interview transcripts
- What was the research question?
- How many participants?
Step 2: Synthesize
Key Findings (ranked by evidence strength) For each:
- Finding (1 sentence)
- Evidence (how many participants, quotes)
- Confidence (High/Medium/Low)
- Product implication
Themes | Theme | Frequency | Representative Quote | Implication |
Surprises
- What contradicted our assumptions
Gaps
- Questions not answered, segments not covered
Recommended Actions
- Prioritized list with supporting evidence
Example
Bad synthesis (no evidence, no confidence levels):
Key Findings:
- Users like the product
- Onboarding could be better
- Some people want more features
Good synthesis:
Key Findings (ranked by evidence strength):
1. Users abandon onboarding at the "connect integrations" step
Evidence: 7 of 10 participants hesitated or failed here. 4 said
variants of "I don't want to give access to my data yet."
Confidence: HIGH
Implication: Move integrations to post-activation. Let users see
value before asking for trust.
2. Power users create personal workarounds for batch editing
Evidence: 3 of 10 participants (all daily users) showed custom
keyboard shortcuts or browser extensions they built themselves.
Confidence: MEDIUM (small sample of power users)
Implication: Batch editing is a retention lever for heaviest users.
Worth exploring, but validate with usage data first.
Surprises:
- 6 of 10 participants didn't know the search feature existed. It's
behind a keyboard shortcut (Cmd+K) with no visible UI entry point.
This contradicts our assumption that search is well-adopted.
Gaps:
- No participants from enterprise segment (>500 employees). Findings
may not generalize to that tier.
- Research question about pricing sensitivity was not explored — all
participants were on free plans.
Rules
- Use actual quotes, never paraphrases. Quotes are evidence. Paraphrases are interpretation.
- Findings from 1-2 participants are signals, not conclusions. Label them accordingly.
- Distinguish said vs. did. Behavior always outranks stated preference.
- Every finding requires a confidence level AND a product implication. A finding without "so what" is trivia.