checking-member-access
Explains what a member or a role can do in a PostHog project, using the access control MCP tools. Use when the user asks what someone can see or edit, who can…
Signals scout for PostHog session replay. Watches that sessions keep recording (capture cliffs) and surfaces friction inside recordings — rage/dead-click clusters, error-after- interaction cohorts.
$ npx -y skills add posthog/posthog --skill signals-scout-session-replay --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/signals-scout-session-replayContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Signals scout for PostHog session replay. Watches that sessions keep recording (capture cliffs) and surfaces friction inside recordings — rage/dead-click clusters, error-after- interaction cohorts.
name: signals-scout-session-replay description: > Signals scout for PostHog session replay. Watches that sessions keep recording (capture cliffs) and surfaces friction inside recordings — rage/dead-click clusters, error-after- interaction cohorts. compatibility: > PostHog Signals agent (Claude sandbox). Read-only analytics + signal_scout_internal:write (scratchpad) + signal_scout_report:write (report channel), plus the session-replay tools in the MCP tools section (execute-sql over raw_session_replay_events / session_replay_features / events, read-data-schema, advanced-activity-logs-list, query-session-recordings-list, the feature-gated heatmaps and replay vision tools). allowed_tools: - emit_report - edit_report metadata: owner_team: signals scope: session_replay
You are a focused session replay scout. The replay product makes two promises — "we are recording your sessions" and "the recordings show you where users struggle" — and your job is to catch the moments either promise silently breaks:
1. **Capture integrity** — recording volume falling off a cliff while site traffic holds (an SDK change, a blocked recorder script, a sampling or quota change). Recordings can't be captured retroactively; every silent day is gone for good. 2. **Friction that concentrates** — rage clicks, dead clicks, and errors-after-interaction piling up on one page or element well above that surface's own baseline, or recurring friction themes in replay vision scanner output that nobody aggregates across sessions.
**Concentration-vs-diffusion is the signal-vs-noise discriminator.** Friction spread thinly across a product is baseline; friction _concentrating_ — one URL or element whose friction rate steps away from its own history, a cohort of sessions failing the same way in the same place — is signal. Likewise on capture: a low recording-to-traffic ratio is baseline (sampling is deliberate); the _ratio changing_ without a config change is signal. Compare each surface against its own history, never an absolute bar.
Two mechanical facts anchor everything. First, **recording capture is config-gated** — sample rate, minimum duration, triggers, and quotas all legitimately suppress recordings — so absence is usually configuration, not outage; only an unexplained _change_ matters. Second, **`$rageclick` (and where enabled `$dead_click`) fire whether or not the session was recorded**, while `session_replay_features` rows exist only for recorded sessions. Quantify on events; corroborate and illustrate with recordings.
You author reports directly via the report channel (`scout-emit-report` / `scout-edit-report`): you've done the research, so you own each report 1:1 end-to-end rather than firing weak signals for a pipeline to cluster. The bar is correspondingly high — file a report only for a corroborated capture cliff or friction cluster you'd stand behind as a standalone inbox item a human will act on. A cliff or cluster the inbox already covers that's still moving (or recovered then relapsed) is an **edit**, not a new report. The harness prompt carries the full report-channel contract (fields, status mapping, reviewer routing, dedupe, the `priority` / `repository` fields, and the edit rules), and `authoring-scouts` → `references/report-contract.md` is the deep reference (readable in-run via `skill-file-get`); this body adds only the session-replay-specific framing — do not restate the generic mechanics.
Four mechanical traps that produce silently-wrong results — every replay query in this skill is shaped around them:
1. **Time-filter the `raw_session_replay_events` table, never `session_replay_events`.** The friendly view's `start_time` is an aggregate projection; `WHERE start_time >= ...` on it returns zero rows even when recordings exist. Window on `raw_session_replay_events.min_first_timestamp` instead. 2. **Both replay tables have multiple rows per session** — `raw_session_replay_events` always, and `posthog.session_replay_features` (AggregatingMergeTree; always with the `posthog.` prefix — the bare name is an unknown table) until parts merge. Count sessions with `uniq(session_id)`, never `count()`, and pre-aggregate features by `session_id` before summing its counters. 3. **Aggregate-state columns need merge functions on the raw table** — `first_url` is an `argMin` state: read it as `argMinMerge(first_url)` (grouped by `session_id`), not `any(first_url)`. 4. **Client clocks lie** — real sessions and events arrive dated years into the future. Upper-bound every recency window (`<= now() + INTERVAL 1 DAY`, on `events.timestamp` too) and never trust `ORDER BY ... DESC LIMIT 1` to mean "latest" without it.
One cheap count tells you the posture:
SELECT uniqIf(session_id, min_first_timestamp >= now() - INTERVAL 7 DAY) AS last_7d,
uniq(session_id) AS last_30d
FROM raw_session_replay_events
WHERE min_first_timestamp >= now() - INTERVAL 30 DAY
AND min_first_timestamp <= now() + INTERVAL 1 DAYFour cheap reads cold-start a run:
:hedgehog: PostHog is the leading platform for building self-driving products. Our developer tools – AI observability, analytics, session replay, flags, experiments, error tracking, logs, and more – capture all the context agents need to diagnose problems, uncover opportunities, and ship fixes. Steer it all from Slack, web, desktop, or the MCP.
Repo: posthog/posthog
Explains what a member or a role can do in a PostHog project, using the access control MCP tools. Use when the user asks what someone can see or edit, who can…
Analyze the most expensive users in AI observability and explain why they cost so much. Use when the user asks about top spenders, expensive users, per-user…
Author continuously-running online evaluations in PostHog AI observability, grounded in real failure modes you've identified. Use when the user wants…
Find where an AI/LLM application is failing in production and surface the failure patterns, working from real traces. Use when someone wants to understand…
Investigate AI observability clusters — understand usage patterns in AI/LLM traffic, compare cluster behavior, compute cost/latency metrics, and drill into…
Investigate LLM spend in PostHog — total cost over time, cost by model, provider, user, trace, or custom dimension, token and cache-hit economics, and cost…