ork-assess
Assess a code change, design, architecture, workflow, or competing options against explicit criteria and evidence. Use when a request asks to assess, rate,…
User personas, customer journey maps, interview guides, usability testing, and card sorting. Use when building user understanding, mapping customer experiences, planning user research sessions, or defining Jobs-to-Be-Done.
$ npx -y skills add yonatangross/orchestkit --skill user-research --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/user-researchContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
User personas, customer journey maps, interview guides, usability testing, and card sorting. Use when building user understanding, mapping customer experiences, planning user research sessions, or defining Jobs-to-Be-Done.
name: user-research license: MIT compatibility: "Claude Code 2.1.251+." description: "User personas, customer journey maps, interview guides, usability testing, and card sorting. Use when building user understanding, mapping customer experiences, planning user research sessions, or defining Jobs-to-Be-Done." tags: [persona, journey-map, user-interview, usability, jtbd, card-sort, empathy-map, research] context: fork agent: product-strategist version: 1.0.0 author: OrchestKit user-invocable: false disable-model-invocation: false complexity: medium persuasion-type: collaborative metadata: category: document-asset-creation allowed-tools: - Read - Glob - Grep - WebFetch - WebSearch
Frameworks for building deep user understanding through structured research methods. Covers personas, journey mapping, interviews, usability testing, and Jobs-to-be-Done.
Choose the right method for your question:
| Method | When to Use | Sample Size | Time | Output | |--------|-------------|-------------|------|--------| | User Interviews | Early discovery, deep understanding | 5-8 | 2-3 weeks | Qualitative insights | | Usability Testing | Validate designs, find issues | 5-10 | 1-2 weeks | Actionable fixes | | Surveys | Quantify attitudes, preferences | 100+ | 1-2 weeks | Statistical data | | Card Sorting | Information architecture | 15-30 | 1 week | IA recommendations | | A/B Testing | Compare alternatives | 1000+ | 2-4 weeks | Statistical winner |
**Rule of thumb:** Start with interviews (5-8 participants) to discover unknowns. Switch to surveys once you have hypotheses to validate.
Personas are fictional composites built from research synthesis. Keep to 3-5 max.
## Persona: [Name] ### Demographics - Age: [Range] - Role: [Job title] - Company: [Type/size] - Tech savviness: [Low/Medium/High] ### Quote > "[Characteristic statement that captures their mindset]" ### Goals 1. [Primary goal - what success looks like] 2. [Secondary goal] ### Pain Points 1. [Frustration with current state] 2. [Obstacle they face] ### Key Insight [The most important thing to remember about this persona]
**Incorrect — vague persona without goals:**
Persona: Sarah, Age 35, Marketing Manager. Likes social media and coffee.
**Correct — actionable persona with goals and pain points:**
Persona: DevOps Dana Quote: "I don't have time for tools that create more work than they save." Goals: Reduce deployment failures, give devs self-service capabilities Pain Points: Alert fatigue from false positives, context-switching between 10+ tools Key Insight: Evaluates tools by "time saved vs. time invested" — needs immediate value.
Maps the end-to-end experience for a specific persona and scenario.
## Journey Map: [Journey Name] ### Persona + Scenario [Which persona | What they're trying to accomplish] ### Stages: Aware → Consider → Purchase → Onboard → Use → Retain For each stage: - **Touchpoints:** [Channel/interaction point] - **Actions:** [What user does] - **Emotions:** [Satisfied / Neutral / Frustrated] - **Pain Points:** [Friction] - **Opportunities:** [How we improve]
Common B2B SaaS stages: `Awareness → Evaluation → Purchase → Onboarding → Adoption → Expansion → Advocacy/Churn`
People don't buy products — they hire them to do specific jobs.
**JTBD Statement Format:**
When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [expected outcome].
**Example:**
When I'm preparing for a board review, I want to quickly see revenue trends, so I can answer questions confidently without scrambling for data.
**Job Dimensions:** | Dimension | Description | |-----------|-------------| | Functional | Practical task to accomplish | | Emotional | How the user wants to feel | | Social | How the user wants to be perceived |
**Opportunity Score:** `Importance + (Importance - Satisfaction)` — scores > 10 indicate high-opportunity areas.
Quick tool for building shared understanding in workshops:
+-------------------------+-------------------------------+ | SAYS | THINKS | | Direct quotes | Worries and concerns | | Questions asked | Aspirations | +-------------------------+-------------------------------+ | DOES | FEELS | | Observable actions | Emotional state | | Workarounds | Frustrations and delights | +-------------------------+-------------------------------+ | PAINS | GAINS | | Fears and obstacles | Wants and needs | +-------------------------+-------------------------------+
| Do | Don't | |----|-------| | Ask open-ended questions | Ask leading questions | | Ask "why" and "how" | Accept surface answers | | Follow interesting threads | Stick rigidly to script | | Take verbatim notes | Paraphrase or interpret |
**Standard interview arc:** Warm-up (5 min) → Context setting (10 min) → Deep dive (25 min) → Wrap-up (5 min)
Read these files for detailed guidance:
The Complete AI Development Toolkit for Claude Code. 106 skills, 36 agents, 171 hooks. Install `ork` for stable (v9.x), or `ork-alpha` for the v10 line, which ships daily.
Repo: yonatangross/orchestkit
Assess a code change, design, architecture, workflow, or competing options against explicit criteria and evidence. Use when a request asks to assess, rate,…
Compare plausible implementation, architecture, product, or operational approaches before committing to one. Use when a request asks to brainstorm, think…
Map an unfamiliar codebase, feature, architecture, data flow, or operational path with file-backed evidence. Use when a request asks how a system works, where…
Make an approved, scoped change and prove the affected behavior. Use when a request asks to implement, build, add, or land a feature that already has an agreed…
Review a pull request or branch for correctness, regressions, security, operational risk, and missing evidence. Use when a request asks to review a PR, review…
Verify that existing work is ready to merge, release, or hand off using an explicit evidence contract. Use when a request asks to verify, validate, prove,…