Proven by Users (provenbyusers.com) platform help — a low-cost, self-serve UX-research and usability-testing suite: card sorting, tree testing, first-click, five-second, preference tests, and surveys, with bring-your-own participants, similarity-matrix/dendrogram and findability analytics, and CSV export (no public API). Use when running a card sort or tree test on a tight budget, reading a similarity matrix or dendrogram, validating site navigation and findability, deciding whether the free 10-response tier is enough, choosing between its 30-day/60-day/1-year one-time plans, recruiting your own participants without a built-in panel, exporting results to CSV, or comparing Proven by Users with Optimal Workshop, UXtweak, Lyssna, or KardSort. Do NOT use for the tool-agnostic validate-before-building method or comparing research tools across the market (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API/webhook-native research pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
Proven by Users (provenbyusers.com) platform help — a low-cost, self-serve UX-research and usability-testing suite: card sorting, tree testing, first-click, five-second, preference tests, and surveys, with bring-your-own participants, similarity-matrix/dendrogram and findability analytics, and CSV export (no public API). Use when running a card sort or tree test on a tight budget, reading a similarity matrix or dendrogram, validating site navigation and findability, deciding whether the free 10-response tier is enough, choosing between its 30-day/60-day/1-year one-time plans, recruiting your own participants without a built-in panel, exporting results to CSV, or comparing Proven by Users with Optimal Workshop, UXtweak, Lyssna, or KardSort. Do NOT use for the tool-agnostic validate-before-building method or comparing research tools across the market (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API/webhook-native research pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
argument-hint
[describe what you need help with in Proven by Users]
license
MIT
version
1.0.0
tags
["sales","pre-launch","platform"]
Proven by Users Platform Help
Proven by Users (provenbyusers.com) is a low-cost, self-serve UX-research + usability-testing suite — the budget end of the information-architecture (IA) cluster. One seat runs the whole battery on a built artifact or a proposed structure: card sorting (subgroups/hierarchies, card images, card duplication into multiple groups, save & return), tree testing (navigation findability), first-click, five-second, preference tests, and surveys — with built-in analytics (similarity matrix, tree/dendrogram view, maximum agreement, group×card, cards, raw, groups, participants views) and CSV export.
Two things to say almost every time:
A clean card sort or tree test proves the structure works, not that anyone will pay. Read the similarity matrix / dendrogram / findability result as evidence the IA is right — if the user is still deciding whether to build, keep the findings but take the go/no-go to a real behavior test via /sales-idea-validation.
Proven by Users has NO participant panel and NO public API. You recruit your own testers (share a link) — there's no built-in panel to buy responses from — and the only data-out is CSV export; a "pipe results into my CRM/warehouse" ask is a scripted CSV job, and a documented REST/webhook pipeline belongs to /sales-userintuition.
Step 1 — Gather context
If references/learnings.md exists, read it first for accumulated platform knowledge.
Ask only what you can't infer:
What do you want from Proven by Users?
A) Pick/run a study — card sort vs tree test vs first-click / five-second / preference vs survey
B) Read the analytics — similarity matrix, dendrogram, maximum agreement; tree-test findability
C) Recruit participants — it has no panel, so share a link to your own users or use a separate recruit tool
D) Get data out — CSV export (no API)
E) Choose a plan — Free (10 responses/project) vs the 30-day / 60-day / 1-year one-time Professional plans
The second is an idea-validation question — flag it in Step 2.
Are you testing an IA you've already got, or still deciding whether to build?
Skip-ahead: if the prompt already names the study type or the question is specific, go to Step 3.
Step 2 — Route or answer directly
If the user's question is about…
Route to
Comparing IA/research tools across the market, or the tool-agnostic validate-before-building method
/sales-idea-validation {question}
The budget one-time-payment twin (card sort/tree test only, rich-media cards, export-only)
/sales-kardsort {question}
The budget MCP-native twin (same battery + an idea-validation engine + an MCP server)
/sales-validatethat {question}
The deep-IA reference-standard peer (benchmark card-sort/tree-test analysis, own panel)
/sales-optimalworkshop {question}
The broad self-serve all-in-one usability peers (own panel, session recording)
/sales-uxtweak or /sales-lyssna{question}
A documented API / webhook-native research pipeline (Proven by Users has none)
/sales-userintuition {question}
Running a real behavior demand test (smoke-test page, waitlist, pre-sale) instead of an IA test
/sales-idea-validation or /sales-funnel{question}
When routing, give the exact command: "This is a {domain} question — run: /sales-idea-validation {original question}"
Otherwise, answer Proven-by-Users-specific questions using Step 3.
Step 3 — Proven by Users platform reference
Read references/platform-guide.md for the full reference — the module/automation-surface table (what's export-accessible vs UI-only), best-effort pricing and plan gates (the free 10-response/project cap, the one-time Professional durations), the study → card → category → participant data model with the CSV analytics views, and the no-API data-out playbook. Proven by Users has no REST API, so there is no API-reference file.
Answer using only the relevant section — don't dump the full reference.
Step 4 — Actionable guidance
In every response, say the caveat: an IA/usability result is not demand. State plainly — even when the user only asked how to fix navigation — that a card sort or tree test proves a structureworks (category agreement, findability) but does not prove strangers will pay. Keep the findings; for any build-or-not question, take the go/no-go to a real behavior test (smoke test, pre-sale) via /sales-idea-validation.
Flag it as CSV-export-only when any automation/API/pipeline comes up. Proven by Users has no public REST API, webhooks, MCP server, or Zapier (verify — it may change). The only data-out is CSV export of the results views, and there is no programmatic pull — so any export is batch, not a live sync. "Sync results to HubSpot/Snowflake on a schedule" is a scripted/scheduled CSV job, not REST — if a documented pipeline is required, route to /sales-userintuition.
Handle the no-panel gap head-on when recruitment comes up. Proven by Users has no built-in participant panel — you can't buy responses inside it. Recruiting is share your study link to your own users/audience (free), or run a separate recruit tool (Prolific/sales-prolific, Respondent/sales-respondent) and paste the link. Over-recruit and screen for fit, because a bad-fit participant wastes a scarce response.
Match the tool to the question, and name the outputs to read. Recommend by job: card sort = how users group/label content (open = discover, closed = validate) — whenever you recommend a card sort, tell the user to read its results via the similarity matrix and the dendrogram/tree view (plus maximum agreement); tree test = can users find things in your nav (findability, no visuals); first-click / five-second / preference = attention and initial reaction. Design the tree with a card sort, then validate it with a tree test.
Warn about the free cap and the one-time pricing model before they hit them. Free is 10 responses per project (unlimited projects, all tools, CSV export) — fine to trial, too small for a powered study. Professional lifts responses to unlimited and is a one-time, non-auto-renewing purchase for a fixed window (30/60/365 days), not a subscription — say this so the user doesn't expect a recurring plan, and present every price as best-effort pointing to provenbyusers.com/pricing.php.
Set participant counts realistically. A stable similarity matrix card sort wants ~30+ participants; a findability tree test similar. Say it's a rule-of-thumb, not a guarantee, and note that a powered study will blow past the free 10-response cap, so budget a Professional window.
If you discover a gotcha or tip not in references/learnings.md, append it there with today's date.
Gotchas
Best-effort from research (2026-07) — pricing, the free-tier response cap, the one-time-payment durations, and the export-only surface; verify at provenbyusers.com.
IA/usability success ≠ demand. A clean card sort or tree test proves the structure works, not that anyone will pay. Route the build-or-not go/no-go to /sales-idea-validation.
No participant panel. Unlike UXtweak/Lyssna/Optimal Workshop, you can't buy responses inside it — recruit your own via a share link, or bring a separate panel tool (Prolific/Respondent). Over-recruit because every response counts against the cap.
No REST API, no webhooks, no MCP, no Zapier. The only data-out is CSV export. Don't design a live pipeline around it — route pipeline needs to /sales-userintuition.
Free tier is a real evaluation cap.10 responses per project (all tools, CSV export, custom branding included) — too small for a powered study; a 30-participant card sort needs a paid window.
Paid plans are one-time, not subscriptions. Professional is a one-time, non-auto-renewing purchase for a fixed window — 30 days $49.95, 60 days $87.95, 1 year $499.95 (best-effort) — so access lapses rather than renews; project setup and results analysis work without an active paid window.
Related skills
/sales-idea-validation — The tool-agnostic validate-before-building method + the full research/usability/validator landscape (use this to decide build-or-not; a passing IA test is not demand). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-idea-validation -a claude-code
/sales-kardsort — The closest budget one-time-payment twin: card sort + tree test only, rich-media/participant-created cards, export-only (no API). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-kardsort -a claude-code
/sales-validatethat — The budget MCP-native twin: the same battery plus an idea-validation engine and an MCP server. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-validatethat -a claude-code
/sales-optimalworkshop — The IA reference standard: deep card sorting (OptimalSort) + tree testing (Treejack) + first-click (Chalkmark) with an own panel. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-optimalworkshop -a claude-code
/sales-uxtweak — Broad self-serve all-in-one usability + IA suite with its own 130-country panel. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-uxtweak -a claude-code
/sales-lyssna — The ex-UsabilityHub usability + IA twin with a larger panel and a usable free plan. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-lyssna -a claude-code
/sales-prolific — Developer-native recruit panel to source participants Proven by Users can't (paste the study share link). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-prolific -a claude-code
/sales-userintuition — The API/webhook/MCP-native research peer — the pick when you need a documented programmatic pipeline Proven by Users can't offer. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-userintuition -a claude-code
/sales-do — Not sure which skill to use? The router matches any sales objective to the right skill. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-do -a claude-code
Examples
Example 1: "I need to fix my app's navigation but I'm on a tiny budget — what do I run?"
User says: "Users can't find settings in my app. I want to test the menu structure without paying Optimal Workshop's prices."
Skill does: Recommends an open card sort first if the labels/categories are in doubt (read via the similarity matrix / dendrogram), then a tree test to validate findability. Notes the Free tier's 10-responses-per-project cap means a real 30-participant study needs a Professional window — and that those are one-time payments, not subscriptions (30/60/365 days). Flags that Proven by Users has no panel, so recruit via a share link or Prolific. Adds that a clean tree test proves the nav works, not that the product sells.
Result: The user runs a properly-powered card-sort → tree-test study on a one-time Professional window for a fraction of the peer price.
Example 2: "How do I get Proven by Users results into my analysis pipeline / automate this?" (developer/automation)
User says: "Can I pull card-sort results out programmatically and push them to our warehouse instead of clicking around?"
Skill does: States plainly that Proven by Users has no public REST API, webhooks, or MCP server — the only data-out is CSV export of the results views (similarity matrix, group×card, raw, participants). Suggests scripting a scheduled CSV export into your own ETL (e.g., parse the raw/participants CSV, load to the warehouse), and cautions that there's no programmatic pull, so it's a manual/scheduled export, not a live sync. If a documented REST + webhooks pipeline is a hard requirement, routes to /sales-userintuition.
Result: The user builds a CSV-export → ETL job instead of hunting for an API that doesn't exist.
Example 3: "Is the free plan enough, and is it a subscription?"
User says: "I want to try card sorting cheaply — what does the free plan cover and what am I paying monthly?"
Skill does: Explains Free = 10 responses per project (unlimited projects, all tools, CSV export, custom branding) — fine for a trial, too small for a powered study. Clarifies that Professional is a one-time, non-auto-renewing purchase for a window (30 days $49.95, 60 days $87.95, 1 year $499.95, best-effort), so nothing recurs. Notes there's no panel (recruit your own), and that setup/analysis work without an active paid window. Presents every figure as best-effort and points to provenbyusers.com/pricing.php.
Result: The user picks the right one-time window for a real study and knows to recruit participants themselves.
Troubleshooting
"Which do I run — a card sort or a tree test?"
Symptom: The user isn't sure whether to test categories/labels or navigation findability.
Solution: Use a card sort when the question is how users group and name content (open = create/label to discover a structure; closed = sort into your categories to validate them → read via the similarity matrix / dendrogram + maximum agreement). Use a tree test when the structure exists and the question is whether users can find an item (findability, no visuals). Run the card sort to design the tree, then the tree test to validate it. Remember: a passing test proves the structure works, not that anyone will pay.
"I set up a study but I have no participants / I hit the free limit."
Symptom: No responses coming in, or the project stopped collecting.
Solution: Two separate causes. (1) No panel — Proven by Users doesn't sell responses; share your study link with your own users/audience, or recruit via Prolific/Respondent and paste the link. Over-recruit and screen for fit. (2) Free cap — Free allows 10 responses per project; a bigger study needs a Professional window (one-time, 30/60/365 days). Decide the window before launch so a powered study isn't cut off at 10.
"How do I get results out / automate exports?"
Symptom: The user wants results flowing into a CRM, warehouse, notebook, or Slack.
Solution: Proven by Users has no public REST API, webhooks, or MCP. Data-out is CSV export of each results view (similarity matrix, group×card, cards, raw, groups, participants). Glue a scheduled CSV export into your own ETL — there's no programmatic pull, so it's manual/scheduled, not a live sync. If an automated documented pipeline is required, route to /sales-userintuition (REST API + HMAC webhooks + MCP).
