SKILL·843ECA

mom-test

wondelai
更新于 Yesterday
1,896
193
1,896
在 GitHub 上查看
测试testingapidesign

关于

This Claude Skill helps developers conduct unbiased customer interviews by applying Mom Test principles, such as discussing past behaviors instead of hypotheticals. It activates when users mention idea validation, interview scripts, or feedback bias to avoid leading questions and false positives. The skill focuses on extracting meaningful signals from conversations while avoiding compliments and vague feedback.

快速安装

Claude Code

推荐
主要方式
npx skills add wondelai/skills -a claude-code
插件命令备选方式
/plugin add https://github.com/wondelai/skills
Git 克隆备选方式
git clone https://github.com/wondelai/skills.git ~/.claude/skills/mom-test

在 Claude Code 中复制并粘贴此命令以安装该技能

技能文档

The Mom Test Framework

Framework for customer conversations that won't lead you astray, based on a fundamental truth: everyone is lying to you -- not maliciously, but because you're asking the wrong questions. The Mom Test provides rules for asking questions so good that even your mom can't lie to you.

Core Principle

Good customer conversations are about their life, not your idea. The moment you mention what you're building, people switch from sharing truth to performing politeness. Talk about their problems, their lives, and their existing behavior instead of pitching, and ask about specifics in the past, not hypotheticals about the future. Above all, talk less and listen more.

Scoring

Goal: 7/7. Score a conversation (or interview plan) by the seven-row Quick Diagnostic below: 1 point per row that passes.

  • 6-7 = focused on their life and past behavior, concrete facts captured, a real commitment (time/reputation/money) secured, they talked 80%+, and beliefs got updated.
  • 4-5 = some past-behavior facts but leaking into hypotheticals, compliments accepted as signal, or ending without an ask.
  • <=3 = a pitch in disguise: leading questions, opinions and fluff, a polite zombie lead, no learning.

Always state the current score out of 7, name the failing diagnostic rows, and give the specific fix for each.

Framework Sections

1. The Mom Test Rules

Core concept: Three rules that make it impossible for even your most supportive loved ones to give you false validation, shifting conversations from opinion-gathering to fact-finding.

Why it works: People are unreliable predictors of their own future behavior, so opinions are worthless. Past behavior is the only reliable data and can genuinely inform product decisions.

Key insights:

  • Rule 1: Talk about their life, not your idea -- never mention your solution until the end, if at all
  • Rule 2: Ask about specifics in the past, not generics or hypotheticals about the future
  • Rule 3: Talk less, listen more -- aim for them to speak 80% of the time
  • A question fails the Mom Test if the answer is always "yes" regardless of whether the business will succeed
  • Good questions could potentially destroy your currently imagined business

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Idea validationAsk about the problem, never the solution"Tell me about the last time you tried to [problem area]" not "Would you use an app that does X?"
Feature prioritizationDiscover what people do vs. what they say"Walk me through how you handled this last week"
Pricing researchAnchor to existing spending behavior"What are you currently paying to solve this?" not "Would you pay $X?"

Copy patterns:

  • "Tell me about the last time you..."
  • "What else have you tried?"
  • "Why does that bother you?"

See: references/question-patterns.md when drafting an interview script -- a 5-tier question hierarchy, domain-specific question banks (SaaS/consumer/marketplace), and four formulation exercises.

2. Good vs Bad Questions

Core concept: Most interview questions are broken because they ask people to predict the future, evaluate hypothetical products, or confirm your assumptions. Good questions anchor in observable past behavior and extract concrete facts.

Why it works: Asking "would you buy this?" is like asking "will you go to the gym next week?" -- the answer is always yes, the follow-through rarely there. Behavior that already happened can't be rationalized away.

Key insights:

  • Bad: "Do you think it's a good idea?" -- always gets a yes
  • Bad: "Would you buy a product that does X?" / "How much would you pay?" -- hypothetical, anchored to please you
  • Good: "How are you dealing with this problem today?" -- reveals actual behavior
  • Good: "What have you tried before and why did you stop?" -- reveals past decisions
  • Good: "Where does the money come from for solutions like this?" -- reveals real budgets
  • The scariest questions -- ones with the power to change what you're building -- produce the most useful data

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Problem validationConfirm the problem exists and matters"When did this last come up? What did you do? What didn't work?"
Market sizingCheck if enough people share the problem"Who else in your industry deals with this? How do they handle it?"
Competitive analysisFind real alternatives already in use"What tools/processes do you currently use for this?"

Copy patterns:

  • "What's the hardest part about [doing this thing]?"
  • "How often does this come up?"
  • "Walk me through what happened the last time this came up"

3. Avoiding Compliments and Opinions

Core concept: Three types of bad data feel like progress but actively mislead: compliments ("That's a great idea!"), fluff (hypotheticals, maybes, future promises), and ideas (feature requests disconnected from real problems). Deflecting these and digging for truth is the core skill.

Why it works: Compliments are the fool's gold of customer development -- they feel amazing but contain zero information about whether anyone will pay or use the product. Only specifics about real past behavior and genuine commitments provide signal.

Key insights:

  • Compliments: deflect immediately and return to concrete facts about how they handle the problem today
  • Fluff: generic claims ("I usually," "I always," "I would never") are worthless without a specific instance
  • Ideas: dig into the motivation behind every feature request -- what's driving it, when they last needed it
  • Fishing for compliments ("Don't you think this would be useful?") is unconscious validation-seeking
  • Symptom of a bad conversation: you walk away feeling great but with no concrete facts or commitments

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Post-demo feedbackDeflect "this looks awesome""Thanks! What part of your current workflow would this replace?"
Feature requestsDig for the underlying job"Why do you want that? Can you show me the last time you needed it?"
Investor conversationsSeparate encouragement from interestAsk for customer intros, not "great idea" feedback

Copy patterns:

  • "Thanks, but to make sure I'm not wasting your time -- what does your current process look like?"
  • "When you say you'd 'definitely' use this, what would you stop using?"
  • "That's a great feature idea -- what problem would it solve for you specifically?"

See: references/avoiding-bad-data.md when a conversation feels good but yields no facts -- how to spot and deflect the three bad-data types (compliments, fluff, ideas) in real time.

4. Commitment and Advancement

Core concept: The currency of a customer conversation is commitment, not compliments. End every conversation with a clear advance toward adoption or a clear rejection -- the worst outcome is a "zombie lead" who is polite but never commits.

Why it works: Saying "I'd definitely buy that" costs nothing; offering an intro, a deposit, or a pilot invests something real. Commitment closes the dangerous gap between what people say and what they do.

Key insights:

  • Commitment currencies: time (meeting, trial), reputation (intro, testimonial), money (deposit, pre-order, letter of intent)
  • Advancing moves the relationship toward a sale; spinning wheels produces pleasant, useless meetings
  • Know your "ask" before the meeting -- the minimum commitment that proves this is real
  • A "no" is more valuable than a "maybe" -- you can learn from it and move on
  • If they won't give you their time, they definitely won't give you their money

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Early validationRequest a commitment that tests interest"Can I follow up with a prototype next week for 15 minutes of your time?"
B2B salesAdvance toward the decision-maker"Could you introduce me to the person who handles the budget for this?"
Pre-launchCollect pre-orders or letters of intent"Launching in 8 weeks -- want to join the first cohort at 40% off?"

Copy patterns:

  • "Who else should I talk to about this?"
  • "Would you be willing to try a prototype next week?"
  • "If I built this, would you be willing to pilot it for 30 days?"

See: references/commitment-advancement.md when a conversation ends without a commitment -- the currency ladder (time/reputation/money) and scripts for advancing instead of spinning wheels.

5. Finding Conversations

Core concept: The best customer conversations happen casually -- warm intros, industry events, online communities, coffee. Formal "customer interview" framing triggers performance mode; casual framing produces honest data.

Why it works: "Can I interview you about your problems?" makes people polished and guarded; "I'm trying to learn about the industry -- can I buy you coffee?" makes them open up. The framing determines the quality of the data.

Key insights:

  • Cold outreach: keep it short, lead with their expertise, don't pitch
  • Warm intros are the best source -- one well-connected advisor can open dozens of doors
  • Go where customers already gather: industry events, meetups, online communities (participate genuinely first)
  • "I'm trying to learn" beats "I'm doing customer research"
  • Use the five-part structure for getting meetings: vision / framing / weakness / pedestal / ask

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Pre-idea explorationImmerse in the target community3 industry events and 20 casual conversations before writing code
B2B prospectingWarm intros through advisors"Our advisor [Name] suggested I ask how you handle [problem area]"
Consumer researchIntercept at the point of behaviorTalk to people in line at the store, the gym, the coworking space

Copy patterns:

  • "I'm researching how [industry] handles [problem] -- could I learn from your experience over a 15-minute coffee?"
  • "[Mutual contact] suggested I talk to you because you know a lot about [area]"
  • "I'm not trying to sell anything -- I'm just trying to understand the space"

Ethical boundary: Never disguise a sales call as a learning conversation -- if you already have a product and are selling, be transparent.

See: references/finding-conversations.md when you need to source interviews -- cold vs warm outreach templates, the five-part meeting ask (vision/framing/weakness/pedestal/ask), and how to keep it casual.

6. Processing and Learning

Core concept: Conversations are only useful if processed: distill raw notes into beliefs, update them regularly, and share with your team. Without a system you'll cherry-pick quotes that confirm your biases.

Why it works: Memory is biased toward recent and emotionally charged information, so teams selectively remember confirming data. Processing as a team prevents any one person's bias from dominating the narrative.

Key insights:

  • Take notes during or immediately after -- never rely on memory
  • Separate facts (what they said and did) from interpretations (what you think it means)
  • Share raw notes with your team, not filtered summaries
  • Update your three key beliefs after each batch: the problem, the customer segment, the solution
  • Stop talking and start building when conversations start repeating
  • Use a simple spreadsheet: who, date, key quotes, facts, commitments, belief changes

Product applications:

ContextApplicationExample
Team alignmentReview notes together weekly5 conversations per week reviewed as a team; belief board updated
Pivot decisionsTrack evidence against core beliefs8 of 10 conversations reveal a different problem than expected -- pivot
Feature validationCount unprompted mentionsA problem named by 7 of 10 people is real; 1 of 10 might not be

Copy patterns:

  • "Our current belief is X -- here's what confirms it and what challenges it"
  • "We've heard this from N of M people -- is that enough signal?"
  • "Time to stop talking and build -- conversations are repeating"

See: references/processing-learning.md after a batch of interviews -- the notes-to-beliefs spreadsheet template, team-review cadence, and signals that it's time to stop talking and build.

Common Mistakes

MistakeWhy It FailsFix
Pitching your idea instead of asking about their lifeTriggers politeness; produces compliments, not factsDon't mention your idea until the very end, if at all
Asking "would you buy this?"Hypothetical yeses cost nothingAsk what they've already done: "How much are you spending on this now?"
Accepting compliments as validation"Great idea!" carries zero information about behaviorDeflect immediately: "Thanks -- but what are you doing about this today?"
Talking too muchYou learn while listening, not talkingThey should talk 80%+ of the time
No clear ask at the endProduces zombie leads that go nowhereKnow your advance before the meeting: trial, intro, pre-order
Running formal "interview" sessionsTriggers performance mode and filtered answersKeep it casual: coffee, hallway conversations, Slack DMs
Not processing notes as a teamIndividual bias filters data into confirmationShare raw notes weekly; update shared beliefs together

Quick Diagnostic

QuestionIf NoAction
Did the conversation focus on their life and past behavior, not your idea?You ran a pitch, not a Mom Test conversationRedo with zero mention of your solution
Did you get concrete facts about what they've already done?You collected opinions and hypotheticalsAsk about the last time the problem occurred and what they did
Did they give a commitment (time, reputation, or money)?Likely a zombie lead -- polite but not interestedAsk for a specific next step: trial, intro, or pre-order
Did they do most of the talking?You talked too much and learned too littlePractice silence; let awkward pauses work for you
Did you learn something that could change what you're building?You asked safe, confirming questionsAsk the scary questions you've been avoiding
Did you update your beliefs based on the conversation?You're collecting data but not learningReview notes with the team; update problem/segment/solution beliefs
Can you summarize the key facts (not opinions)?Poor notes, or opinions confused with factsSeparate facts from interpretations immediately after

See: references/case-studies.md when you want to see the rules applied end-to-end -- realistic SaaS, consumer, B2B, and marketplace interviews scored against this diagnostic.

Further Reading

This skill is based on Rob Fitzpatrick's Mom Test methodology:

About the Author

Rob Fitzpatrick is an entrepreneur and educator who founded multiple venture-backed startups and learned the hard way that most customer conversations produce misleading feedback. The Mom Test (2013) distills his evidence-based approach, has been translated into 20+ languages, and is required reading at accelerators including Y Combinator and Techstars. He also wrote The Workshop Survival Guide and Write Useful Books.

GitHub 仓库

wondelai/skills
路径: plugins/product-strategy/skills/mom-test
0
agent-skillsai-skillsbusinessclaude-codeclaude-code-marketplaceclaude-code-plugin
FAQ

常见问题

什么是 mom-test Skill?

mom-test 是一个 Claude Skill,作者为 wondelai。Skill 将 Claude 按需加载的说明和资源打包,让 Claude 无需额外提示即可执行与 mom-test 相关的任务。

如何安装 mom-test?

使用本页的安装命令:将 mom-test 作为插件添加到 Claude Code,或将其仓库克隆到 skills 目录,然后重启 Claude 以加载该 Skill。

mom-test 属于哪个分类?

mom-test 属于测试分类。

mom-test 可以免费使用吗?

可以。mom-test 已收录在 AIMCP,可免费安装。

相关推荐技能

evaluating-llms-harness
测试

该Skill通过60+个学术基准测试(如MMLU、GSM8K等)评估大语言模型质量,适用于模型对比、学术研究及训练进度追踪。它支持HuggingFace、vLLM和API接口,被EleutherAI等行业领先机构广泛采用。开发者可通过简单命令行快速对模型进行多任务批量评估。

查看技能
cloudflare-cron-triggers
测试

这个Claude Skill提供了关于Cloudflare Cron Triggers的完整知识库,用于通过cron表达式定时执行Workers。它支持配置周期性任务、维护作业和自动化工作流,并能处理常见的cron触发错误。开发者可以用它来设置定时任务、测试cron处理器,并集成Workflows和Green Compute功能。

查看技能
webapp-testing
测试

该Skill为开发者提供了基于Playwright的本地Web应用测试工具集,支持自动化测试前端功能、调试UI行为、捕获屏幕截图和查看浏览器日志。它包含管理服务器生命周期的辅助脚本,可直接作为黑盒工具运行而无需阅读源码。适用于需要快速验证本地Web应用界面和交互功能的开发场景。

查看技能
finishing-a-development-branch
测试

这个Skill用于开发分支完成后的集成决策,当代码实现完成且测试通过时,它会引导开发者选择合适的工作流。它首先验证测试状态,然后提供合并、创建PR或清理等结构化选项。核心价值在于确保代码质量的同时,标准化分支收尾流程。

查看技能