Listen Labs (listenlabs.ai) platform help — AI-moderated qualitative research that interviews REAL people (voice/video/audio/text) at scale, with a full public REST API v2 (create study, launch, self-recruit link, pull responses/transcripts), an official OAuth MCP server for Claude/Cursor/ChatGPT, Emotional Intelligence (Ekman) analysis, Quality Guard fraud detection, and a 30M+ panel or bring-your-own participants. Use when setting up a Listen Labs study or discussion guide, launching a study from code, pulling interview responses into a CRM or warehouse (poll updatedSince — no webhooks), wiring the MCP server into Claude Code, choosing panel vs self-recruit participants, authenticating the API (x-api-key), reading its enterprise/demo-first pricing, or migrating off the deprecated unversioned response endpoints. Do NOT use for comparing AI-interview/research tools or the validate-before-building method (use /sales-idea-validation), or analyzing existing NPS/CSAT/VoC feedback (use /sales-customer-feedback).
Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
Listen Labs (listenlabs.ai) platform help — AI-moderated qualitative research that interviews REAL people (voice/video/audio/text) at scale, with a full public REST API v2 (create study, launch, self-recruit link, pull responses/transcripts), an official OAuth MCP server for Claude/Cursor/ChatGPT, Emotional Intelligence (Ekman) analysis, Quality Guard fraud detection, and a 30M+ panel or bring-your-own participants. Use when setting up a Listen Labs study or discussion guide, launching a study from code, pulling interview responses into a CRM or warehouse (poll updatedSince — no webhooks), wiring the MCP server into Claude Code, choosing panel vs self-recruit participants, authenticating the API (x-api-key), reading its enterprise/demo-first pricing, or migrating off the deprecated unversioned response endpoints. Do NOT use for comparing AI-interview/research tools or the validate-before-building method (use /sales-idea-validation), or analyzing existing NPS/CSAT/VoC feedback (use /sales-customer-feedback).
argument-hint
[describe what you need help with in Listen Labs]
license
MIT
version
1.0.0
tags
["sales","pre-launch","platform"]
github
https://github.com/listenlabs
Listen Labs Platform Help
Listen Labs (listenlabs.ai) runs AI-moderated qualitative research on REAL people — a voice, video,
audio, or text interviewer that asks personalized, adaptive follow-ups and runs stimulus/concept tests at
scale, synthesizing themes, personas, Emotional Intelligence, and executive reports. Recruit from a 30M+
global panel or bring your own participants via a self-recruit link.
Its edge in the real-human AI-moderated-interview cluster (User Intuition, Strella, Voicepanel, Outset,
Conveo) is twofold: (1) it interviews real people, not synthetic personas; and (2) it ships both a
full public REST API v2 (create study → launch → self-recruit link → pull responses/transcripts) and an
official OAuth MCP server — the most complete API+MCP surface after User Intuition. The catch: it's sold
demo-first / annual contract (enterprise-priced), and there are NO webhooks — data-out is poll-only.
The one caveat to say every time: a real interview is far stronger than a synthetic "yes", but a stated
"I'd pay for this" is still not a purchase — keep the why (objections, language, reasoning) and take
the willingness-to-pay go/no-go from a real behavior test (pre-sale, smoke test).
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 Listen Labs?
A) Set up a study — write the study guide (screener + interview + concept blocks), pick
voice/video/audio/text mode
B) Recruit — the 30M+ panel (wallet-billed) vs a self-recruit link for your own participants (BYOP)
C) Automate — drive it from the MCP server (Claude/Cursor/ChatGPT) or the REST API v2
D) Wire up data — pull responses/transcripts into a CRM / warehouse / Slack (poll updatedSince)
E) Interpret a report / Emotional Intelligence / personas, or decide whether to trust it for a decision
Panel or your own participants, and what's the research question? A sharp studyGoal + the right
audience yields depth; a vague one yields shallow filler.
Skip-ahead: if the user wants to AI-interview/research tools across the market, or the
validate-before-building , that's a question — route in Step 2.
compare
method
/sales-idea-validation
Step 2 — Route or answer directly
If the user's question is about…
Route to
Comparing AI-interview/research/synthetic tools, or the validate-before-building method
/sales-idea-validation {question}
Running a real behavior demand test (smoke-test page, waitlist, pre-sale) after interviews
/sales-idea-validation or /sales-funnel{question}
Analyzing existing NPS/CSAT/VoC/review feedback (post-launch, not new interviews)
/sales-customer-feedback {question}
A peer that needs HMAC webhooks / self-serve REST pipeline
/sales-userintuition {question}
When routing, give the exact command: "This is a {domain} question — run: /sales-idea-validation {original question}"
Otherwise, answer Listen-Labs-specific questions using Step 3.
Step 3 — Listen Labs platform reference
Read references/platform-guide.md for the full reference — the capability/automation-surface table
(what's API-accessible, MCP-accessible, or UI-only), best-effort enterprise pricing and plan gates, the
Study → Study Guide → Response → Transcript data model (JSON shapes), integrations, and quick-start recipes.
For raw endpoints, auth, the study-guide OpenAPI schema, the response/transcript shapes, the MCP setup, and
an end-to-end poll script, read references/listenlabs-api-reference.md.
Answer using only the relevant section — don't dump the full reference.
Step 4 — Actionable guidance
Say the caveat: a real interview ≠ a purchase. Whatever the user asks, make explicit that Listen Labs
interviews real humans (a step up from synthetic personas — genuine reasoning, objections, language),
but a stated "I'd pay" in an interview is not observed demand. Keep the why — mine the transcripts
for objections, hesitation, and pricing language — and take the go/no-go from a real behavior test
(pre-sale, smoke-test click) — route that to /sales-idea-validation.
There are NO webhooks — design data-out as a poll. To pipe completed interviews into a CRM/warehouse,
poll GET /api/public/v1/responses/{linkId} with updatedSince (ISO 8601) and keep an updatedAt
cursor; set includeInProgress=false for completed-only; drill into a transcript with
GET /responses/{linkId}/{responseId}. Never tell the user to "register a webhook" — Listen Labs doesn't
have them (unlike User Intuition / Great Question).
The create → launch flow is three requests.POST /api/public/v1/studies/create (validates the guide,
returns a draft id + linkId) → GET /api/public/v1/wallets (pick one; omit walletId only if the org
has exactly one) → POST /api/public/v1/studies/{studyId}/launch (returns selfRecruitLink). Auth is the
x-api-key header, org-scoped, created from the account Developer section.
Branch on code, not error. Validation failures return a stable code (invalid_request_body with
an issues[] array, or invalid_study_guide for a cross-field rule); the human-readable error text may
change. Retry 409 concurrent_modification / 409 study_busy after a short delay.
For agent automation, use the MCP server.https://listenlabs.ai/mcp (OAuth on first use; access
token ~1h auto-refreshed, refresh ~30d; role-scoped, "acts as you"). It creates/edits/launches studies,
searches studies/themes, and fetches AI analysis reports as markdown — but you still need an active org.
Present pricing as best-effort and enterprise/demo-first. Listen Labs doesn't publish pricing;
buying is a sales conversation (scoping, screener review, procurement — ~2–4 weeks), best-effort
~$20K annual base + $300–400/session. State figures as best-effort and point to a Listen Labs demo — it
is not a self-serve solopreneur tool. Prefer a self-recruit link with your own participants to
avoid panel per-session cost.
Migrate off deprecated endpoints. The unversioned /api/public/responses/... paths are removed
2026-08-01 — always use /api/public/v1/responses/....
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, panel size, the API/MCP surface, and native integrations
move; verify at listenlabs.ai and docs.listenlabs.ai.
Real ≠ demand. Interviews reveal the why better than any synthetic tool, but a stated intent to pay
is not a purchase — the go/no-go still belongs to a real behavior test (pre-sale, smoke test).
No webhooks — poll updatedSince. Unlike User Intuition/Great Question, Listen Labs has no push
channel; reconcile new/updated interviews by polling GET /responses/{linkId}?updatedSince=<ISO8601>.
Unversioned response endpoints die 2026-08-01. Build on /api/public/v1/responses/..., not the old
/api/public/responses/... paths.
Enterprise/demo-first — no self-serve. No published pricing, no public free trial; onboarding is a
sales/scoping process (~2–4 weeks). API keys require an active org (Developer section, Admin/Supervisor).
Study-guide validation is server-side and cross-field. The screening block must be first and hold
only multiple_choice items with a status on every option; externalIds must be unique; conditionals
must reference an earlier item's externalId. A broken rule → 400 invalid_study_guide.
Wallet required with multiple wallets. Omit walletId at launch only when the org has exactly one;
otherwise 400 wallet_required. 400 insufficient_credits = the wallet can't fund the launch.
Emotional Intelligence / Quality Guard are report/fielding-layer, UI-first. The API exposes a
qualityScore per response, but the Ekman emotion analysis and fraud-prevention tuning live in the UI.
Related skills
/sales-idea-validation — The tool-agnostic validate-before-building method + the full research/persona/interview tool landscape (use this to actually decide build-or-not; an interview "yes" is not demand)
/sales-userintuition — User Intuition platform help (the peer with the deepest developer surface — a self-serve REST API, HMAC-signed completed-interview webhooks, a CLI, and an MCP server; recommend it over Listen Labs when you need a webhook-native pipeline or self-serve access without an enterprise contract)
/sales-strella — Strella platform help (the deterministic-scripted-flow real-human peer — UI-only, no API/webhooks/MCP; pick it when scripted repeatability matters more than a programmatic pipeline)
/sales-voicepanel — Voicepanel platform help (the broadest-format, MCP-first real-human peer — voice/video/chat/phone + screen-share usability tasks; an MCP server but no REST API or webhooks, access onboarded in waves)
/sales-great-question — Great Question platform help (the all-in-one research-ops suite — recruit + run any method + repository, with a REST API + HMAC webhooks + MCP all at once)
/sales-customer-feedback — Analyze existing NPS/CSAT/VoC/review feedback post-launch (vs Listen Labs, which runs new interviews with real people)
/sales-funnel — Build the smoke-test / fake-door landing page that turns an interview hypothesis into a real demand test
/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: "The interviews loved my concept — should I build it?"
User says: "I ran 30 Listen Labs interviews and most said they'd use and pay for it. Green light?"
Skill does: Credits the signal as real (actual humans, genuine reasoning — better than a synthetic
tool), then draws the line: a stated "I'd pay" in an interview is not a purchase. Tells the user to
mine the transcripts for objections, hesitation, and pricing language (the real value — and to read the
Emotional Intelligence signal for where enthusiasm was hollow) and take the go/no-go from a real behavior
test — a pre-sale or a "buy" click — routed via /sales-idea-validation. Flags pricing as best-effort.
Result: The founder keeps the qualitative depth and runs a pre-sale before committing weeks of build.
Example 2: Pipe completed interviews into HubSpot (developer/automation)
User says: "When an interview finishes, I want the transcript and summary in HubSpot. How do I set up the webhook?"
Skill does: Corrects the premise — Listen Labs has no webhooks — and gives the poll pattern instead:
poll GET /api/public/v1/responses/{linkId} with updatedSince (ISO 8601) and includeInProgress=false,
keep an updatedAt cursor, and for each progress: "complete" row fetch
GET /responses/{linkId}/{responseId} for the full transcript, mapping bulletSummary/tags/qualityScore
onto the contact. Auth is the x-api-key header. Points to references/listenlabs-api-reference.md for the
Python poll loop.
Result: Completed transcripts land on the HubSpot contact via a resilient poll, not a webhook that doesn't exist.
Example 3: Create and launch a study from code
User says: "How do I create and launch a study from the API and get a link to send my own users?"
Skill does: Describes the three requests — POST /api/public/v1/studies/create with a study guide
(screener block first, interview block; validated up front → draft id + linkId), GET /wallets to pick
one (omit walletId only if the org has exactly one), then POST /studies/{studyId}/launch → selfRecruitLink.
Notes branch on code not error for validation failures, and that a self-recruit link with your own
users avoids panel per-session cost. Points to the OpenAPI study-guide schema in the API reference.
Result: The user fields a study programmatically and distributes the self-recruit link to their own audience.
Troubleshooting
"My webhook endpoint never receives completed interviews"
Symptom: You set up a listener expecting Listen Labs to POST completed interviews, and nothing arrives.
Cause: Listen Labs has no webhooks. There is no push channel at all (this differs from User
Intuition and Great Question, which do sign completed-interview webhooks).
Solution: Poll GET /api/public/v1/responses/{linkId} with updatedSince (ISO 8601) on an interval
matched to fielding speed (interviews trickle in over hours), keep an updatedAt cursor, set
includeInProgress=false for completed-only, and drill into GET /responses/{linkId}/{responseId} for the
transcript. See the Python loop in references/listenlabs-api-reference.md. If you need a webhook-native
pipeline, route to /sales-userintuition.
"My study create call returns a 400"
Symptom: POST /api/public/v1/studies/create fails with a 400.
Cause: Either the body failed schema validation (code: invalid_request_body, with an issues[] array
naming the field), or the study guide broke a cross-field rule (code: invalid_study_guide) — most often the
screening block isn't first / has a non-multiple_choice item / an option is missing status, a duplicate
externalId, or a conditional referencing an item that isn't earlier.
Solution: Branch on code, not the error text. Read issues[].path for field errors; for
invalid_study_guide, put the screening block first with only multiple_choice items (every option carries
approve/reject/neutral), make externalIds unique, and ensure conditionals reference an earlier item.
"Launch fails asking for a wallet, or says insufficient credits"
Symptom: POST /studies/{studyId}/launch returns 400 wallet_required or 400 insufficient_credits.
Cause: Your org has multiple wallets and you omitted walletId (it auto-selects only when there's
exactly one), or the chosen wallet's projectCreditBalance/recruitmentCreditBalance can't fund the launch.
Solution: Call GET /api/public/v1/wallets, pick a walletId with enough balance (remember usage
includes active holds), and pass it in the launch body. Top up recruitment/project credits before launching a
panel study; a self-recruit link with your own participants avoids panel recruitment cost.
