AGENT SKILLBY GOOSEWORKS-AI
Messaging AB tester
AT A GLANCE
Messaging AB tester is an agent skill for CRO. Stop debating which message is better — test it. It is published by gooseworks-ai in the gooseworks-ai/goose-skills GitHub repository (912 stars) under the MIT license. Install it with: npx skills add gooseworks-ai/goose-skills --skill messaging-ab-tester
- SOURCE REPOSITORY
- gooseworks-ai/goose-skills (opens GitHub in a new tab)
- REPO STARS
- SOURCE REPOSITORY
- LICENSE
- MIT
- SKILL.MD SIZE
- 8.6 KB254 LINES
QUICK ANSWER
- WHAT IT IS01
- 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. It stands out by giving messaging AB tester a defined shape, so the agent asks for better context and returns a more usable result.
- INPUTS02
- Context the agent needs: your goals, audience, constraints, and any source material the skill asks for.
- OUTPUT03
- A ready-to-use result: the analysis, copy, or recommendations the agent produces.
INSTALL
One command adds this skill from its source repository.
npx skills add gooseworks-ai/goose-skills --skill messaging-ab-testerREAD THE SKILL.MD BELOW BEFORE YOU RUN IT. SKILLS INSTRUCT YOUR AGENT.
SKILL.MD
The full file, as published in the source repository. Copy it, download it or open it on GitHub.
ON THIS PAGE · 21
Messaging A/B 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.
When to Use#
- "Which of these value props should we lead with?"
- "Test our messaging angles and tell me which works"
- "I can't decide between [message A] and [message B]"
- "What messaging resonates most with [ICP]?"
- "Run a messaging test for [product/feature]"
Phase 0: Intake#
What to Test#
- Core value prop — The claim or positioning you want to test (e.g., "We help growth teams run outbound 10x faster")
- Test goal — What are you deciding? (Headline for website, cold email angle, LinkedIn content strategy, ad copy direction)
- ICP — Who should this resonate with? (Title, company type, stage)
- Current messaging — What are you using today? (Baseline to beat)
Test Channel#
- Where to test:
- LinkedIn organic — Post variants across consecutive days, compare engagement
- Cold email — A/B test subject lines or opening hooks via Smartlead
- Both — Run in parallel for fastest signal
- Sample size available:
- LinkedIn: followers/typical impressions per post
- Email: list size available for testing
Constraints#
- Number of variants — 3-5 recommended (more = slower signal)
- Test duration — How long to run? (Default: 1 week for LinkedIn, 3-5 days for email)
Phase 1: Generate Messaging Variants#
Create 3-5 variants that test different angles, not just different words. Each variant should represent a distinct strategic bet:
Variant Types#
| 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." |
Variant Template#
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]Phase 2: Deploy Tests#
Option A: LinkedIn Organic Test#
Setup:
- Schedule variants as consecutive posts (1 per day, same time of day)
- Each post should be similar length and format (control for post structure)
- Don't boost any posts — organic only for clean comparison
Measurement (after 48 hours per post):
- Impressions
- Reactions (likes, celebrates, etc.)
- Comments
- Comment sentiment (positive/negative/neutral)
- Profile visits (if trackable)
- DMs received mentioning the post
Option B: Cold Email A/B Test#
Setup via your outreach tool (Smartlead, Instantly, Lemlist, or any tool with A/B testing):
- Create campaign with all variants as A/B test sequences
- Split list evenly across variants (minimum 50 per variant for signal)
- Same send time, same sender, same CTA — only the messaging changes
Measurement (after 5 days):
- Open rate (tests subject line)
- Reply rate (tests full message resonance)
- Positive reply rate (tests conversion quality)
- Click rate (if link included)
Option C: Both (Recommended)#
Run LinkedIn and email in parallel. Different channels may show different winners — that's valuable signal about where each message works best.
Phase 2B: Collect Results#
After the test has run for the planned duration, gather your results:
How to provide data:
- Paste metrics — Copy open rates, reply rates, engagement numbers directly into the chat
- CSV export — Export campaign analytics from your outreach tool and share the file
- Screenshot — Take a screenshot of your dashboard/analytics and share it
- Manual input — Just tell the agent the numbers: "Variant A got 45% open rate and 3% reply rate, Variant B got 52% open rate and 5% reply rate"
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.
Phase 3: Analyze Results#
Scoring Framework#
| 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% | — |
Statistical Significance Check#
For email tests:
- Minimum sends per variant: 50 (for directional signal), 200+ (for confident decisions)
- Minimum difference to call a winner: >20% relative difference in primary metric
For LinkedIn tests:
- Minimum posts per variant: 1 (you're testing with limited data — treat as directional)
- Minimum impressions: 500 per post to be comparable
Winner Selection#
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]Phase 4: Output Format#
# 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.
Cost#
| 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 |
Tools Required#
None. Pure reasoning for variant generation, test design, and result analysis. The user deploys tests through their own tools:
- LinkedIn organic — post variants manually or via scheduling tool
- Cold email — set up A/B tests in whatever outreach tool they use (Smartlead, Instantly, Lemlist, etc.)
- Results — user provides metrics (screenshots, CSV exports, or manual input) for analysis
Trigger Phrases#
- "Test which messaging angle works best for [ICP]"
- "Run a messaging A/B test for [value prop]"
- "Which of these messages should we lead with?"
- "Help me decide between these positioning options"
FAQ
07 QUESTIONS
01What is the Messaging AB tester agent skill?
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. It is listed under CRO and go-to-market in the 100xLab agent skills directory.
02How do I install Messaging AB tester in Cursor, Claude Code, or Codex?
Run npx skills add gooseworks-ai/goose-skills --skill messaging-ab-tester in the project where you want it, then ask your agent for the skill by name. The --skill flag installs only Messaging AB tester, not every skill in the repository.
03What does the Messaging AB tester SKILL.md cover?
The SKILL.md includes sections on When to Use, Phase 0: Intake, What to Test, Test Channel, Constraints and Phase 1: Generate Messaging Variants. Read the full text on this page or in plain markdown at /resources/agent-skills/gooseworks-ai-goose-skills--messaging-ab-tester--1ce9ekk/raw.
04Which agents can use Messaging AB tester?
Messaging AB tester installs with the cross-agent skills installer (npx skills add), which sets it up for agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and Codex. Each agent loads the SKILL.md when you ask for the skill by name.
05What license is Messaging AB tester under?
The gooseworks-ai/goose-skills repository declares the MIT license. Read the license file in the repository before you copy or redistribute the skill.
06Is Messaging AB tester free to use?
Reading, copying and installing Messaging AB tester costs nothing: it is published in a public GitHub repository under the MIT license. Reuse and redistribution follow that license.
07Where is the source of Messaging AB tester?
Messaging AB tester comes from https://github.com/gooseworks-ai/goose-skills, which has 912 GitHub stars. The SKILL.md is at https://github.com/gooseworks-ai/goose-skills/blob/HEAD/skills/brand/composites/messaging-ab-tester/SKILL.md. The author is gooseworks-ai.
Need an agent workflow built around your stack?
Tell us the workflow you want automated. We reply within 4 working hours (IST).
ATTRIBUTION
Messaging AB tester was written by its original authors and is published in gooseworks-ai/goose-skills (opens GitHub in a new tab) under the MIT license. All rights stay with the original authors.
100xLab did not write, maintain or endorse this skill. This page lists it for discovery. Repo stars belong to the source repository, not to the skill. Review any skill before you install it.