Gtm decision
Close a running GTM experiment — collect the results defined in gtm/exp-NNN/TASKS.md from real data only, judge them against the criteria locked at start, and write DECISION.md with an honest Continue / Iterate / Kill verdict. Use when the user runs /gtm-decision or says an experiment has ended.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add llmjp/usecaseify-gtm --skill gtm-decisionAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- 28 days oldThe repository was created 28 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
4.6 KB, 995 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
GTM Decision
An experiment ended. Your job: gather honest results, judge them against the rules that were locked before the experiment started, and record the human's final call.
Mode: with USECASEIFY_API_KEY set, report the outcome to the registry (connected
mode — this closes the experiment's public page and unlocks your next enrichment).
Without a key, everything below works fully offline.
Step 1 — Locate the experiment
Find gtm/exp-*/criteria.lock.json for the running experiment (if several, ask which).
Read the locked rules, primary metric, minimum evidence, and duration from it — the
locked file, not from memory, not from BRIEF.md edits made after the start.
Step 2 — Collect results (real data only)
Open the experiment's TASKS.md → "Results to report" — the exact quantitative fields
this experiment committed to measure.
For each field: read it from the real data source the implementation set up (saved SQL
query, export script, analytics view, database). If a value cannot be read from real
data, set it to "unknown". Never estimate, extrapolate, or fill in a plausible number —
a fabricated number poisons the verdict.
Then ask the founder: the qualitative questions from TASKS.md, whether anything unexpected or any implementation issue could distort the data, and a one-paragraph summary in their own words.
Step 3 — Confirm before judging
Show a table of every value and where it came from. Get an explicit yes. (Connected mode: this is also what gets published — aggregate numbers only, never customer-identifying data, never secrets.)
Step 4 — Judge against the locked rules
First run the data-quality checklist (deterministic — do this before any judgment):
-
no_quantitative_data— no numeric results at all -
missing_primary_metric— fields needed for the primary metric are missing/unknown -
insufficient_sample— largest relevant count below the locked minimum sample -
ended_too_early— ran less than half the locked duration -
self_reported_only— only qualitative, self-reported evidence
Then decide — exactly one of:
- continue — evidence supports the assumption; the next investment is justified
- iterate — the underlying problem/demand looks real, but the approach, message, price, or implementation needs to change
- kill — evidence does not support continued investment in this assumption
Rules of judgment:
- Judge against the LOCKED rules first. If results are ambiguous between two verdicts, pick the one the locked rules support and say why.
- Confidence is
low/medium/high— qualitative only. Any flag above caps it atmedium; a severe flag (missing_primary_metric,insufficient_sample,ended_too_early) forceslow. No exceptions, including for exciting results. - Use ONLY numbers present in the collected results, quoted verbatim. Never compute figures that were not reported. Never say "market validated".
- List evidence for and against the verdict, and at least one limitation.
- Recommend exactly ONE next experiment (2–3 sentences).
Step 5 — Deliver and record the final call
- Write
gtm/exp-NNN/DECISION.mdperdocs/format.md: the verdict large and unsoftened, confidence, rationale against the locked rules, results table, evidence both ways, limitations + data-quality flags, what it means in plain business language, the one next experiment, and next actions for human and agent. - The founder decides, not you. Ask: accept the recommendation, or override it? An override requires a one-line reason, recorded in DECISION.md next to the AI recommendation — both stay on the record.
- Connected mode:
POST {base}/api/v1/reportwith the results, verdict, final call, and override reason if any — this closes the public page honestly (an abandoned experiment can also be closed asabandoned; that too is honest data). (If the server is unreachable, skip the report and note it — the local DECISION.md remains the record.) - Update
experiment.jsonstatus tocompleted, suggest committinggtm/. - If CONTINUE or ITERATE: offer
/gtm-next-experimentfor the follow-up. If KILL: acknowledge plainly — a clean kill is a successful experiment; it just saved weeks of misdirected work.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.