marketing-cro
Use when optimizing conversion rates, designing A/B tests, or improving landing pages. Covers A/B testing methodology, landing page optimization, form design, statistical significance, funnel analysis, and CRO prioritization frameworks.
How do I install this agent skill?
npx skills add https://github.com/vasilyu1983/ai-agents-public --skill marketing-croIs this agent skill safe to install?
- Gen Agent Trust Hubpass
The skill is a collection of best practices, frameworks, and instructions for Conversion Rate Optimization (CRO). It contains no executable code, scripts, or sensitive data access and is entirely safe to use.
- Socketpass
No alerts
- Snykwarn
Risk: MEDIUM · No issues
- Runlayerwarn
1/1 file flagged
What does this agent skill do?
CRO — CONVERSION OPTIMIZATION OS (OPERATIONAL)
Built as a no-fluff execution skill for systematic conversion rate optimization.
Structure: Core CRO fundamentals first. Advanced testing in dedicated sections. AI/ML optimization in clearly labeled "Optional: AI / Automation" sections.
Modern Best Practices (January 2026)
- Google Optimize sunset: Use VWO, Optimizely, or PostHog
- Statistical significance: https://www.evanmiller.org/ab-testing/
- CXL Institute: https://cxl.com/
- Baymard Institute UX: https://baymard.com/
- Cookie deprecation + stricter privacy defaults: prefer first-party measurement, validate assignment/tracking, and treat lifts as uncertain without clean instrumentation
When to Use This Skill
- Landing page optimization: Hero, CTA, proof, form optimization
- A/B testing: Hypothesis design, sample size, statistical significance
- Funnel analysis: Drop-off identification, micro-conversion mapping
- Form optimization: Field reduction, multi-step forms, friction removal
- Trust/credibility: Social proof, security signals, guarantees
When NOT to Use
- Brand awareness campaigns → Use marketing-paid-advertising
- User research methodology → Use software-ux-research
- Product analytics setup → Use marketing-product-analytics
- SEO/organic traffic → Use marketing-seo-complete
Expert: CRO Mental Model (Quick Calibration)
Use this to avoid local wins / global losses.
- CRO: Increase the rate of valuable commitments (purchase, qualified lead, activation) while protecting business outcomes (revenue, margin, LTV, support load).
- UX optimization: Reduce friction/errors so users can do what they already intend; good UX does not guarantee better conversions.
- Funnel optimization: Optimize the system across steps and handoffs (traffic quality → intent match → page → form/checkout → sales/onboarding → retention).
- Experimentation: A causal learning method; not every decision belongs in a test.
Do not delegate these to A/B tests (even with infinite traffic): legal/compliance/ethics, dark patterns, misleading claims, and irreversible brand trust decisions.
Core: CRO Framework
The CRO Process
1. ANALYZE → Identify conversion problems (data + qualitative)
2. HYPOTHESIZE → Form testable hypotheses
3. PRIORITIZE → Score by impact/effort (ICE/PIE)
4. TEST → Run A/B tests with statistical rigor
5. LEARN → Document results, iterate
6. IMPLEMENT → Roll out winners, test next
Conversion Rate Benchmarks
| Page Type | Poor | Average | Good | Great |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Landing page | <1% | 2-3% | 4-5% | >6% |
| Checkout | <40% | 50-60% | 65-75% | >80% |
| Form completion | <20% | 30-40% | 45-55% | >60% |
| Add to cart | <3% | 5-8% | 9-12% | >15% |
Note: Benchmarks vary significantly by industry. Use as directional only.
Core: Landing Page Optimization
Above-the-Fold Checklist
Every landing page needs these elements visible without scrolling:
| Element | Requirement | Common Issues |
|---|---|---|
| Headline | Clear value proposition | Vague, company-focused |
| Subheadline | Specific benefit or outcome | Missing or weak |
| Hero image/video | Relevant, shows outcome | Stock photos, irrelevant |
| CTA | Prominent, action-oriented | Hidden, generic text |
| Trust signal | Logo strip, rating, or stat | Missing entirely |
Headline Formula
[Outcome] + [Timeframe/Ease] + [Without Pain Point]
Examples:
"Get 10 qualified leads per week without cold calling"
"File your tax return in 15 minutes with expert review"
"Double your email conversions without hiring a copywriter"
CTA Button Best Practices
| Do | Don't |
|---|---|
| "Start Free Trial" | "Submit" |
| "Get My Quote" | "Click Here" |
| "Book My Demo" | "Learn More" (bottom of funnel) |
| "Download the Guide" | "Send" |
CTA Button Optimization:
- Size: Large enough to tap on mobile (min 44px height)
- Color: Contrasts with page background
- Position: Above fold AND after key sections
- Text: First person ("Get My...") often outperforms second person
- Whitespace: Use spacing to isolate the primary CTA from competing elements; treat big lift claims as case-dependent and verify in your context
Trust Elements Hierarchy
STRONGEST TRUST SIGNALS (use at least 3):
├─ Customer logos (recognizable brands)
├─ Review score (4.5+ stars with count)
├─ Security badges (SSL, payment, compliance)
├─ Money-back guarantee
└─ Phone number visible
SUPPORTING TRUST SIGNALS:
├─ Customer testimonials (with photo, name, company)
├─ Case study snippets (specific metrics)
├─ "As seen in" media logos
├─ Team photos (for services)
├─ Live chat widget
└─ Physical address (for services)
User-Generated Content (UGC)
UGC often increases conversions in SaaS and e-commerce, but lift magnitude varies widely by category, placement, and traffic intent.
| UGC Type | Placement | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Customer videos | Hero or below fold | High trust, high engagement |
| Review excerpts | Near CTA | Reduces uncertainty |
| Case study quotes | Consideration section | Builds credibility |
| Community mentions | Footer or social proof bar | Volume signal |
Implementation: Pull from G2, Capterra, or in-app feedback. Verify permissions before use.
Core: Form Optimization
Form Field Rules
| Rule | Why | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum fields | Every field adds friction | Often lowers completion (magnitude varies) |
| Email first | Captures partial submissions | +15-30% lead capture |
| Persistent labels | Placeholders disappear, cause errors | +10% completion |
| Single column | Easier flow | +5-10% completion |
| Inline validation | Catch errors early | +22% completion |
| Browser autofill | Reduces typing, fewer errors | +15-20% completion |
2026 Benchmark: Average checkout = 5.1 steps, 11.3 fields (Baymard). Target ≤5 fields for lead gen.
Field Priority (Ask Only What You Need)
| Priority | Field | When Required |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Always | |
| 2 | Name | If personalization needed |
| 3 | Company | B2B only |
| 4 | Phone | Sales-ready leads only |
| 5 | Job title | Enterprise targeting |
| 6+ | Everything else | Gate behind progressive profiling |
Multi-Step Form Pattern
Step 1: Low commitment (email)
├─ "What's your email?"
├─ Progress indicator: 1 of 3
└─ CTA: "Continue"
Step 2: Qualifying info
├─ Company size / Industry
├─ Progress indicator: 2 of 3
└─ CTA: "Almost there"
Step 3: Contact info
├─ Name / Phone (optional)
├─ Progress indicator: 3 of 3
└─ CTA: "Get My [Deliverable]"
Multi-step benefits:
- Commitment and consistency principle
- Captures partial data (even if abandoned)
- Feels less overwhelming
- Can qualify leads progressively
Core: A/B Testing Methodology
Hypothesis Template
IF we [change/add/remove X]
THEN [metric] will [increase/decrease] by [estimate]
BECAUSE [reasoning based on data/research]
Example:
IF we add customer logos to the hero section
THEN form conversion will increase by 15%
BECAUSE trust signals reduce perceived risk for new visitors
Sample Size Calculator
Minimum sample size formula (simplified):
n = (16 × p × (1-p)) / MDE²
Where:
- n = sample per variant
- p = baseline conversion rate
- MDE = minimum detectable effect (e.g., 0.10 for 10% lift)
Example:
Baseline CVR: 3% (0.03)
MDE: 20% relative lift (looking for 3.6% or higher)
n = (16 × 0.03 × 0.97) / (0.006)²
n ≈ 12,933 per variant
Total traffic needed: ~26,000 visitors
Quick reference:
| Baseline CVR | 10% MDE | 20% MDE | 30% MDE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1% | 63,000 | 15,800 | 7,000 |
| 3% | 20,700 | 5,200 | 2,300 |
| 5% | 12,200 | 3,050 | 1,350 |
| 10% | 5,800 | 1,450 | 650 |
Per variant. Multiply by 2 for total traffic needed.
Statistical Significance
Requirements for valid test:
- 95% confidence level (minimum)
- 80% power (default) unless you have a reason to change it
- Run for at least 1-2 full business cycles (7-14 days)
- Don't peek and stop early (increases false positives)
- Document before test: hypothesis, primary metric, guardrails, sample size, duration
- Avoid post-hoc slicing; pre-register segments or adjust for multiple comparisons
Reality check (expert defaults):
- Statistical significance does not mean the change is worth shipping (check practical impact + guardrails)
- Ignore "significant" results when experiment integrity is in doubt (tracking issues, traffic mix shifts, SRM, broken randomization)
- Stop early only for clear harm (guardrail breaches) or invalidity (instrumentation/assignment problems), not for "early wins"
Experiment Integrity (2026 Default Checks)
- Assignment sanity: A/A test periodically; check SRM on day 1 and day 3
- Tracking sanity: confirm event definitions, dedupe, cross-domain, and consent-mode behavior before interpreting results
- Contamination: avoid showing multiple variants to the same user across devices/sessions; prefer stable IDs when possible
- Change control: freeze other major changes to the same flow during the test window
CUPED: Faster Tests via Variance Reduction
CUPED (Controlled-experiment Using Pre-Existing Data) can reduce variance by ~40-60%, allowing tests to reach significance faster.
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| How it works | Uses pre-experiment user behavior to control for inherent variance |
| Lookback window | 1-2 weeks (optimal balance) |
| Limitation | Doesn't work for new users (no history) |
| Platforms | VWO, Optimizely, Statsig, Eppo, PostHog |
When to use: High-traffic sites where test velocity matters. See advanced-testing.md for implementation details.
Test Prioritization: ICE Framework
| Factor | Score (1-10) | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Impact | How much will this move the metric? | |
| Confidence | How sure are we this will work? | |
| Ease | How easy is this to implement? | |
| ICE Score | (Impact + Confidence + Ease) / 3 |
ICE Score interpretation:
- 8-10: High priority, test immediately
- 5-7: Medium priority, add to queue
- 1-4: Low priority, revisit later or skip
Core: Funnel Analysis
Funnel Diagnostic Framework
STEP 1: Map your funnel
Page Visit → Key Action → Form Start → Form Complete → Confirmation
STEP 2: Measure drop-off at each step
├─ Page Visit to Key Action: ___% (bounce rate inverse)
├─ Key Action to Form Start: ___%
├─ Form Start to Complete: ___%
└─ Complete to Confirmation: ___%
STEP 3: Identify biggest drop-off
Biggest percentage drop = highest priority to fix
STEP 4: Diagnose root cause
├─ High bounce? → Relevance, load speed, messaging
├─ Low engagement? → Content, CTA visibility
├─ Form abandonment? → Form friction, trust
└─ Checkout drop? → Pricing, shipping, trust
Expert note: The "biggest drop-off" is not always the best target. Confirm it's a defect (not intentional filtering), not a measurement artifact, and not caused upstream (traffic quality / offer mismatch).
Micro-Conversion Mapping
| Funnel Stage | Micro-Conversions to Track |
|---|---|
| Awareness | Scroll depth, time on page, video views |
| Interest | CTA hover, tab/section views, resource clicks |
| Consideration | Pricing page visit, comparison page, demo video |
| Decision | Form start, add to cart, checkout start |
| Conversion | Form complete, purchase, signup |
Heatmap & Recording Analysis
What to look for:
- Click heatmaps: Are users clicking CTAs? Clicking non-clickable elements?
- Scroll maps: Where do users stop scrolling? Key content below fold?
- Session recordings: Where do users hesitate? Rage clicks? Form confusion?
- Form analytics: Which fields cause abandonment? Error patterns?
Core: In-App Monetization Gate Timing
Freemium and subscription apps must decide when to show an upgrade prompt (paywall, modal, soft gate). Getting this wrong is a silent activation killer.
The Rule
Never show a monetization gate before the user has received first value. A gate shown too early trains users to leave, not to pay.
Gate Trigger Patterns
| Trigger | Mechanism | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| Value-first | Show gate only after the user completes a core action (e.g., generates a report, sees results) | Default for all products |
| Scroll-based | Show gate after user scrolls past the first valuable content block | Content-heavy products, dashboards |
| Engagement timer | Show gate after 15-30s of active engagement (not wall-clock time) | Products with immediate visible value |
| Usage count | Show gate after N free uses (e.g., 3 questions, 5 exports) | Products with repeatable core actions |
| Feature boundary | Gate specific premium features; leave core experience free | Products with clear free/paid feature split |
Timing Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Impact | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Immediate gate on first visit | 40-60% bounce before any value delivered | Defer until after first value moment |
| Timed gate < 5s | Users haven't oriented yet; feels like a trap | Minimum 15s active engagement OR scroll/action trigger |
| Gate before scroll | Blocks users from discovering content below fold | Use scroll-depth trigger (e.g., past first content section) |
| Full-screen blocker on free content | Punishes users for engaging | Use soft gates (banner, inline CTA) for free-tier content |
| Gate interrupting onboarding | Breaks first-run experience | Complete onboarding → deliver first value → then gate |
Gate Placement Decision Tree
WHEN TO SHOW THE MONETIZATION GATE:
1. Has the user completed onboarding?
└─ No → DO NOT gate. Let them finish.
2. Has the user seen their first valuable result?
└─ No → DO NOT gate. Deliver value first.
3. Has the user had time to orient?
(scrolled past first content block OR 15s+ active engagement)
└─ No → DO NOT gate. Wait for engagement signal.
4. User has received value and engaged → GATE IS SAFE
└─ Choose format:
├─ Soft gate (banner/inline) → for free-tier content the user can still access
└─ Hard gate (modal/overlay) → for premium features the user cannot access
Measurement
Track the impact of gate timing on activation:
gate_shown→gate_dismissedvsgate_converted(immediate)gate_shown→generated_readingor core value event within 7 days (downstream activation)- Compare activation rates for cohorts who saw the gate at different points in their journey
Reference: Triage, Speed, SOPs
For page speed targets, CRO triage decision tree, operating cadence, and anti-patterns, see references/triage-and-ops.md.
Templates
| Template | Purpose |
|---|---|
| landing-audit.md | Full landing page audit |
| ab-test-plan.md | A/B test planning |
| form-audit.md | Form optimization checklist |
| funnel-analysis.md | Funnel diagnostic |
| ice-scoring.md | Test prioritization |
Expert: Hypothesis Quality (Silent Failure Checklist)
A good CRO hypothesis is not "change X to raise CVR." It must specify mechanism and risk.
Strong hypothesis includes:
- Which constraint it targets: clarity, trust, motivation, friction
- Who it's for: segment/intent/channel/device (at least one)
- What moves: primary metric + guardrails (value, quality, downstream)
- Why it should work: evidence + mechanism (not vibes)
How CRO fails silently (common):
- Conversions go up but value goes down (lower-quality leads, higher refunds/chargebacks, worse retention)
- Overall looks flat but a high-value segment is harmed (mix effects hide damage)
- "Win" is novelty or seasonality; it doesn't repeat
Use assets/ab-test-plan.md to pre-register guardrails and invalidation criteria.
References
| Reference | Description |
|---|---|
| advanced-testing.md | CUPED, sequential testing, MAB |
| ai-automation.md | AI personalization, tool stack |
| form-optimization.md | Field reduction, multi-step forms, validation UX |
| landing-page-optimization.md | Hero patterns, CTA placement, layout frameworks |
| mobile-cro.md | Thumb zones, tap targets, mobile checkout, speed |
| personalization-strategies.md | Dynamic content, behavioral targeting, tool comparison |
| social-proof-trust-signals.md | Testimonials, reviews, trust badges, B2B/B2C patterns |
| triage-and-ops.md | Page speed, triage, SOPs, anti-patterns |
| pricing-page-optimization.md | Pricing psychology, plan tiers, enterprise vs self-serve |
| checkout-optimization.md | Cart abandonment, payment UX, checkout flow design |
International Markets
This skill uses US/UK defaults. For international CRO:
| Need | See Skill |
|---|---|
| Regional payment methods | marketing-geo-localization |
| Cultural trust signals | marketing-geo-localization |
| Regional CTA adaptation | marketing-geo-localization |
| RTL/localized design | marketing-geo-localization |
Auto-triggers: When your query mentions regional markets or cultural adaptation, both skills load automatically.
Related Skills
- marketing-geo-localization — International markets, cultural CRO
- marketing-leads-generation — Lead capture strategies
- marketing-paid-advertising — Traffic sources
- marketing-seo-complete — Page speed, Core Web Vitals
- software-ui-ux-design — Design patterns
- software-ux-research — User research methods
Usage Notes (Claude)
- Stay operational: return checklists, audit results, test plans
- Always include statistical significance requirements for testing
- Recommend qualitative research for low-traffic sites
- Use benchmark ranges, not absolute numbers
- Do not invent conversion data; state "varies by industry" when uncertain
How can the creator link this skill?
Add the canonical catalog link to the repository README so users can inspect current installs and available audits. The publishing guide covers the complete discovery path.
<a href="https://skillzs.dev/skills/vasilyu1983/ai-agents-public/marketing-cro">View marketing-cro on skillZs</a>