skills / research

research-synthesis

what it does

Synthesize user research into themes, insights, and recommendations. Use when you have interview transcripts, survey results, usability test notes, support tickets, or NPS responses that need to be distilled into patterns, user segments, and prioritized next steps.

Verified Before and after: 2 models 1 try per case View source Download .zip

Compare the answers

Answers from Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol · try 1 of 1

Same request, same model, once with the skill and once without. Read both and judge for yourself.

“Summarize what we learned from this usability test on report export.”

Source material given with the request

Task: "Export last month's sales report as a CSV file." 5 participants, moderated, remote. Post-task question: "How easy was that?" (1 = very hard, 7 = very easy) P1: Looked in Settings, then Help. Found Export under the "..." menu after 4 min. Rated 6. "Pretty easy." P2: Looked in Share, then Settings. Gave up after 5 min. Rated 3. P3: Opened the "..." menu straight away, exported in 40 s. Rated 7. P4: Looked in Share, gave up after 4 min. Rated 5. "Fine once you know where it is." P5: Hovered over toolbar icons, found Export under "..." after 3 min 30 s. Rated 6. "Easy enough."
with the skill
## Research Synthesis: Report Export **Method:** Moderated remote usability test | **Participants:** 5 **Task:** “Export last month's sales report as a CSV file.” ### Executive Summary Export was difficult to discover for 4 of 5 participants: three completed the task, but only one did so quickly. Two participants gave up after looking elsewhere. Ease ratings were relatively positive despite these difficulties, so ratings alone would overstate usability. The clearest opportunity is to make Export more visible and test whether that improves unaided task completion. ### Key Findings #### 1. Export’s location was not obvious **Prevalence:** 4 of 5 participants searched elsewhere before finding Export or giving up. **Evidence:** - P1 searched Settings and Help before finding Export under “…” after 4 minutes. - P2 searched Share and Settings, then gave up after 5 minutes. - P4 searched Share, then gave up after 4 minutes. - P5 hovered over toolbar icons before finding Export under “…” after 3 minutes 30 seconds. **Interpretation:** The “…” menu was not an obvious starting point for most participants. Share and Settings were recurring alternative locations, suggesting a mismatch between the interface and participants’ expectations.
Show the rest (36 more lines)
#### 2. Discovery appears to be the main bottleneck **Prevalence:** 3 of 5 completed the task; 2 of 5 gave up. | Outcome | Participants | Time | |---|---|---| | Completed quickly | P3 | 40 seconds | | Completed after searching | P1, P5 | 4 minutes; 3 minutes 30 seconds | | Gave up | P2, P4 | 5 minutes; 4 minutes | **Interpretation:** P3’s quick completion after opening “…” immediately suggests the export flow may be straightforward once located. However, these notes do not establish whether selecting last month or choosing CSV presented any additional issues. #### 3. Positive ease ratings masked behavioral friction **Average ease rating:** 5.4/7; **median:** 6/7. **Evidence:** - P1 rated the task **6/7** and said “Pretty easy,” despite a four-minute search. - P4 rated it **5/7** and said “Fine once you know where it is,” despite giving up. - P5 rated it **6/7** and said “Easy enough,” after searching for three and a half minutes. **Interpretation:** Perceived ease and observed performance diverged. The reasons are unknown; these ratings should not be treated as evidence that discoverability is good. ### Recommendations | Priority | Opportunity | Basis | |---|---|---| | **High** | Test a visible, labeled **Export** action in the report toolbar rather than relying solely on “…” | 4 of 5 participants did not go directly to the current location | | **Medium** | Test whether export should also be accessible through **Share**, or whether clearer labeling distinguishes the two | 2 of 5 looked in Share | | **High—validation** | Retest using unaided completion rate, time to find Export, and first-click location alongside ease ratings | Ratings obscured substantial friction | ### Questions for Further Research - Once Export is found, can users reliably select the correct date range and CSV format? - Does a visible Export action improve discovery for first-time users? - What did participants consider when rating ease, particularly those who struggled or gave up? ### Methodology Notes This small, moderated study provides directional evidence, not population-level estimates. Prior product familiarity, moderator assistance, and exported-file correctness were not documented. Only P3 demonstrated quick completion; this is insufficient to infer distinct user segments.
without
## Key finding **Export was difficult to discover, despite generally positive ease ratings.** Only one participant found it immediately; the other four searched elsewhere or explored the toolbar before finding it or giving up. ### What we observed - **3 of 5 completed the task.** Two gave up after 4–5 minutes. - **Only P3 took a direct path**, opening “…” and exporting in 40 seconds. The other successful participants took 3 minutes 30 seconds and 4 minutes. - **Share and Settings were common first guesses:** two participants tried each. This suggests the current location under “…” did not match several participants’ expectations. ### What the ratings tell us—and don’t The average ease rating was **5.4/7**, but that masks substantial friction. P1 and P5 rated the task 6 despite lengthy searches, and P4 rated it 5 despite giving up. Positive ratings and comments should therefore not be treated as evidence that the task was easy to complete. ### Implications - Make Export more visible—for example, test a clearly labeled **Export** action in the report toolbar. - Consider an entry point near **Share**, where multiple participants looked. - Retest using **unassisted completion, time, and search paths** alongside ease ratings. With five participants, these findings are directional rather than population estimates, but they provide a clear reason to prioritize export discoverability.

Answers are shown exactly as the model wrote them, from the first try, and nothing is picked by hand.

The models

2 models

Claude Sonnet 5.5

made by Anthropic

claude-sonnet-5-5 · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 1 Nov 2026

GPT-6.1 Sol

made by OpenAI

gpt-6.1-sol · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 1 Nov 2026

The tasks

written by Carte Blanche
biased-feature-survey

“We surveyed users about what to build next. Write up the findings for the team.”

expense-interviews

“I ran six interviews about our expense app last week. Can you pull out the main themes and what we should do about them?”

export-usability-test

“Summarize what we learned from this usability test on report export.”

nps-verbatims

“Here are last month's NPS responses. What's our score, and what's driving it?”

support-ticket-spike

“Group these support tickets and tell me what we should look at first.”

Install

Download the .zip and unzip it. Put its files, in a folder named research-synthesis, here:

Claude Code~/.claude/skills/Every project. For one project only, use .claude/skills/ inside it.
Codex~/.agents/skills/Every project. For one repository only, use .agents/skills/ inside it.
Cursor~/.cursor/skills/Cursor also reads the Claude Code and Codex folders above.

Then start a new session and ask for what the skill does. Other agents that read SKILL.md have their own skills folder; check their docs.

Coming after launch: get skills from inside your agent, no download needed.