gooseworks-ai/messaging-ab-tester
> Generate 3-5 messaging variants for a value proposition, design structured A/B tests, and analyze results to determine which framing resonates most with ICP. Tests can run via LinkedIn organic posts, cold email subject line splits, or both. Pure reasoning for variant generation and analysis — the user deploys the tests through their own tools. Use when a team can't decide between messaging angles and needs data, not opinions.
npx skills add https://github.com/gooseworks-ai/goose-skills --skill messaging-ab-tester
Stop debating which message is better — test it. Generate messaging variants, deploy them through real channels, and measure which framing actually resonates with your ICP.
Core principle: At seed/Series A, you don't have enough traffic for website A/B tests. But you do have enough LinkedIn impressions and cold email sends to test messaging angles fast.
Create 3-5 variants that test different angles, not just different words. Each variant should represent a distinct strategic bet:
| Type | What It Tests | Example |
|------|--------------|---------|
| Outcome-driven | Leading with the result | "3x your pipeline in 30 days" |
| Pain-driven | Leading with the problem | "Tired of spending 4 hours a day on manual prospecting?" |
| Identity-driven | Leading with who they are | "Built for growth teams who move fast" |
| Proof-driven | Leading with evidence | "How [Customer] went from 10 to 50 demos/month" |
| Contrast-driven | Leading with what you're not | "Not another CRM. An outbound engine." |
For each variant:
VARIANT [N]: [Type — e.g., "Outcome-driven"]
Hypothesis: This framing will resonate because [reasoning tied to ICP psychology]
LinkedIn post version:
---
[Full post copy — 100-200 words, native LinkedIn format]
---
Email subject line version:
[Subject line — max 50 chars]
Email opening hook version:
[First 2 sentences of an email]
Headline version:
[Website headline — max 10 words]
Setup:
Measurement (after 48 hours per post):
Setup via your outreach tool (Smartlead, Instantly, Lemlist, or any tool with A/B testing):
Measurement (after 5 days):
Run LinkedIn and email in parallel. Different channels may show different winners — that's valuable signal about where each message works best.
After the test has run for the planned duration, gather your results:
How to provide data:
For LinkedIn tests: Go to your post analytics (click "View analytics" on each post) and share impressions, reactions, comments, and profile visits per post.
For email tests: Export or screenshot your campaign's variant/A-B test results showing sends, opens, and replies per variant.
The agent will normalize whatever format you provide into the scoring framework below.
| Metric | Weight (LinkedIn) | Weight (Email) |
|--------|-------------------|----------------|
| Engagement rate | 30% | — |
| Comment quality | 30% | — |
| Open rate | — | 30% |
| Reply rate | — | 40% |
| Positive reply rate | — | 30% |
| Impressions | 20% | — |
| Profile visits / clicks | 20% | — |
For email tests:
For LinkedIn tests:
WINNER: Variant [N] — [Type]
Primary metric: [X] (vs average of [Y] across other variants)
Relative improvement: [Z%] over baseline
Why it won:
[1-2 sentences on what this tells us about ICP messaging preferences]
Runner-up: Variant [N]
[1 sentence on when this might work better — different channel, different segment]
# Messaging A/B Test Results — [DATE]
Value prop tested: [description]
ICP: [target audience]
Test duration: [dates]
---
## Test Design
| Variant | Type | Hypothesis |
|---------|------|-----------|
| A | [Type] | [Hypothesis] |
| B | [Type] | [Hypothesis] |
| C | [Type] | [Hypothesis] |
---
## Results
### LinkedIn Test
| Variant | Impressions | Reactions | Comments | Engagement Rate | Score |
|---------|------------|-----------|----------|----------------|-------|
| A | [N] | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [weighted] |
| B | [N] | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [weighted] |
| C | [N] | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [weighted] |
### Email Test
| Variant | Sends | Opens | Open Rate | Replies | Reply Rate | Positive | Score |
|---------|-------|-------|-----------|---------|------------|----------|-------|
| A | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [weighted] |
| B | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [weighted] |
| C | [N] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [X%] | [N] | [weighted] |
---
## Winner: Variant [N] — "[Headline]"
**Why it won:** [Analysis — what does this tell us about how our ICP thinks?]
**Recommended deployment:**
- Website headline: "[adapted version]"
- Sales deck opening: "[adapted version]"
- LinkedIn bio: "[adapted version]"
- Cold email default: "[adapted version]"
---
## Variant Details & Copy
### Variant A: [Full copy used in test]
### Variant B: [Full copy used in test]
### Variant C: [Full copy used in test]
---
## What to Test Next
Based on these results, the next messaging test should explore:
1. [Angle suggested by results — e.g., "test more specific proof points since proof-driven won"]
2. [Segment test — e.g., "test winning message against different ICP segment"]
Save to the current working directory or wherever the user prefers.
| Component | Cost |
|-----------|------|
| Variant generation | Free (LLM reasoning) |
| LinkedIn posting | Free (organic) |
| Email testing | Included with your outreach tool's plan |
| Results analysis | Free (LLM reasoning) |
| Total | Free |
None. Pure reasoning for variant generation, test design, and result analysis. The user deploys tests through their own tools:
Take gooseworks-ai/messaging-ab-tester from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.