UXtweak (uxtweak.com) platform help — an all-in-one, self-serve UX research and usability-testing suite: card sorting, tree testing, first-click / five-second / preference tests, website / mobile / prototype (Figma) usability testing, session recording, surveys, and moderated interviews, plus a 130-country participant panel, a recruiting widget, and own-database recruiting. UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP; data leaves via CSV / PDF export or native Figma / Dovetail / Notion / Google Drive integrations. Use when setting up a card sort or tree test to fix site navigation, testing a Figma prototype with real users, hitting the panel minimum spend or free-plan response caps, choosing between UXtweak and Maze / Lyssna / UserTesting / Optimal Workshop, or exporting results without an API. Do NOT use for comparing research tools or the validate-before-building method (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API-native AI-moderated interview pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
Installer avec Codex ou Claude Copiez ce prompt, collez-le dans Codex, Claude ou un autre assistant, puis laissez-le vérifier la page du skill et l'installer pour vous.
Une commande directe contourne le prompt de vérification. Examinez la source avant de l'exécuter.
UXtweak (uxtweak.com) platform help — an all-in-one, self-serve UX research and usability-testing suite: card sorting, tree testing, first-click / five-second / preference tests, website / mobile / prototype (Figma) usability testing, session recording, surveys, and moderated interviews, plus a 130-country participant panel, a recruiting widget, and own-database recruiting. UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP; data leaves via CSV / PDF export or native Figma / Dovetail / Notion / Google Drive integrations. Use when setting up a card sort or tree test to fix site navigation, testing a Figma prototype with real users, hitting the panel minimum spend or free-plan response caps, choosing between UXtweak and Maze / Lyssna / UserTesting / Optimal Workshop, or exporting results without an API. Do NOT use for comparing research tools or the validate-before-building method (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API-native AI-moderated interview pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
argument-hint
[describe what you need help with in UXtweak]
license
MIT
version
1.0.4
tags
["sales","pre-launch","platform"]
UXtweak Platform Help
UXtweak (uxtweak.com) is an all-in-one, self-serve UX research and usability-testing suite — the
tool you reach for when you have a design, prototype, or live site and want real users to test it.
It bundles the whole battery in one seat: information-architecture research (card sorting, tree
testing), quick design tests (first-click, five-second, preference), task-based usability
testing (website, mobile app, Figma prototype), session recording, surveys, and
moderated interviews — plus recruiting from its own 130-country participant panel, a
website recruiting widget, or your own database. Its peers are Maze, Lyssna,
UserTesting, Optimal Workshop; its "Swiss-army-knife for IA + mixed-methods" breadth is the edge (also why reviewers call the UI cluttered).
Two things to say almost every time:
UXtweak tests a built thing, and a task-completion metric is not validated demand. A high
success rate or a clean tree test tells you the design works — it does not tell you strangers
want to buy it. If the user is still deciding whether to build at all, that willingness-to-pay
go/no-go belongs to a real behavior test (smoke test, pre-sale) — route to /sales-idea-validation.
UXtweak is UI-only.No public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP — so any "pipe results into my CRM/warehouse" ask is manual CSV/PDF export or a native integration (Figma, Dovetail, Notion,
Google Drive/OneDrive, Condens, Marvin, GTM), not REST — an API-native pipeline is /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 UXtweak?
A) Pick a study type — card sort vs tree test vs first-click vs five-second vs prototype/website test
B) Recruit participants — the 130-country User Panel vs the on-site recruiting widget vs your own database
D) Get data out — export CSV/PDF or push to Figma / Dovetail / Notion (no API — manual/native only)
E) Choose — UXtweak vs Maze / Lyssna / UserTesting / Optimal Workshop for your use case
Are you testing something you've already built/designed, or still deciding whether to build? The
second is an idea-validation question, not a usability question — flag it in Step 2.
Skip-ahead: if the user's prompt already names the study type and their question is specific, go to Step 3.
Step 2 — Route or answer directly
If the user's question is about…
Route to
Comparing research/idea/synthetic tools across the market, or the validate-before-building method
/sales-idea-validation {question}
An API / webhook / MCP-native research or interview pipeline (UXtweak has none)
/sales-userintuition {question}
Running a real behavior demand test (smoke-test page, waitlist, pre-sale) instead of a usability test
/sales-idea-validation or /sales-funnel{question}
Analyzing existing NPS/CSAT/VoC/review feedback (post-launch, not new tests)
/sales-customer-feedback {question}
When routing, give the exact command: "This is a {domain} question — run: /sales-idea-validation {original question}"
Otherwise, answer UXtweak-specific questions using Step 3.
Step 3 — UXtweak platform reference
Read references/platform-guide.md for the full reference — the study-type catalog (what each tool
measures + how to read its output), the module/automation-surface table (what's exportable vs UI-only),
best-effort pricing and plan gates (the free-tier per-tool response caps, the panel minimum spend), the
Study → Task → Participant → Response data model, recruiting (panel vs widget vs own database), and the
no-API data-out playbook. UXtweak has no public API, so there is no API-reference file.
Answer using only the relevant section — don't dump the full reference.
Step 4 — Actionable guidance
Say the caveat: a usability metric is not demand. Whatever the user asks, make explicit that
UXtweak measures whether a built design/flow works (task success, findability, first-click
accuracy) — it does not prove strangers will pay. If they're still deciding whether to build,
keep the usability findings but take the go/no-go from a real behavior test (smoke test, pre-sale)
via /sales-idea-validation.
Flag it as UI-only when any automation/export comes up. UXtweak has no public API, webhooks,
Zapier, or MCP (verify against current docs — it may change). "Sync results to HubSpot/Snowflake"
is a manual CSV/PDF export or a native integration (Figma, Dovetail, Notion, Google Drive,
OneDrive, Condens, Marvin, GTM) — not a REST pipeline. If the user needs a programmatic pipeline, tell
them so and route to /sales-userintuition.
Match the study type to the question. Recommend by job: card sorting = how users group/label
content (open = discover categories, closed = validate yours); tree testing = can users find
things in your nav (findability + first-click path, no visual design); first-click = where users
click first on a screen; five-second = first impression / recall; preference = A/B of designs;
prototype/website test = task-based usability with success/time metrics; session recording =
watch real visitor behavior. Don't run a tree test to judge visuals or a five-second test for navigation.
Warn about the free-plan caps and the panel minimum spend before they hit them. The Free plan is
tight — best-effort ~15 responses/month with per-tool caps (e.g. card sorting ~10 responses/20
cards/2 tasks; tree testing ~3 responses/1 task), 1 active study, 14-day result retention, and
no session recording, no User Panel, no live interviews, no video export. Recruiting from the
User Panel carries a minimum spend (commonly cited ~$200), so for a handful of testers,
recruiting from your own users (widget or own-database) is far cheaper. State this up front.
Present all pricing as best-effort. UXtweak's public pricing shows plan shapes more than exact
numbers, and Live Interviews / highlights-reels-transcripts / User Panel participants are paid
add-ons on Business. State any figure as best-effort and point the user to uxtweak.com/pricing.
Set participant counts realistically. For qualitative usability (task tests, moderated), ~5
participants per user group surfaces most major issues; for quantitative IA (card sort / tree test),
aim higher (roughly 30+ for a stable similarity matrix / findability score). Say the number is a
rule-of-thumb, not a guarantee.
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 caps, the panel minimum spend, the module/add-on split, and the (absent) API/export surface move; verify at uxtweak.com.
Usability ≠ demand. UXtweak proves a design works, not that anyone will buy — the go/no-go on
building still belongs to a real behavior test (smoke test, pre-sale). Route that to /sales-idea-validation.
No API, no webhooks, no Zapier, no MCP. UXtweak is UI-only; data-out is manual CSV/PDF export
or native integrations (Figma, Dovetail, Notion, Google Drive, OneDrive, Condens, Marvin, GTM).
Don't design a live REST pipeline around it — route pipeline needs to /sales-userintuition.
Free plan is capped hard. ~15 responses/month with per-tool limits (card sort ~10, tree test ~3),
1 active study, 14-day result retention, and no session recording / User Panel / live
interviews / video export. It's for a single tiny study, not a research program.
User Panel has a minimum spend (~$200, best-effort). Recruiting a few testers from the panel isn't
economical — for small samples, recruit your own users via the recruiting widget or own-database.
Breadth = clutter. Reviewers say the all-in-one UI feels dense/outdated — expect a learning curve; start from one study type rather than exploring every module.
Its moderated-interview depth is not its strength. UXtweak's core is unmoderated usability + IA;
for deep AI-moderated interviews (adaptive probing, verbatim synthesis) the specialists are stronger
— name User Intuition / Strella / Voicepanel; for deep specialist IA, Optimal Workshop (/sales-optimalworkshop).
Add-ons are plan-gated. Live Interviews, highlights/reels/transcripts, and User Panel participants are paid add-ons on Business; SSO/SCIM and unlimited studies are Custom/Enterprise.
Related skills
/sales-lyssna — The near-twin usability + IA suite (ex-UsabilityHub) — the same battery (five-second / first-click / preference, card sort, tree test, prototype/website tests, surveys) on a larger 690k+ panel with a more usable free plan (3 seats, unlimited quick studies) and AI follow-ups/summaries; route here to compare the two or when panel size / free-tier generosity matters. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-lyssna -a claude-code
/sales-userbrain — The narrow, cheaper usability peer: only task-based think-aloud video (screen + voice recordings, AI highlights, transcripts, clips) with no card sort / tree test / IA battery — route here when the user just wants to watch real people use a built thing and hear why. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-userbrain -a claude-code
/sales-useberry — The prototype-first usability peer (design-led, deep Figma/Sketch/ProtoPie import like Maze) — route here to compare, or when prototype-flow depth matters; note Useberry has no panel of its own (recruits via Prolific) where UXtweak brings its own 130-country panel. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-useberry -a claude-code
/sales-optimalworkshop — The IA "reference standard" peer: deep, specialist card sorting (OptimalSort) + tree testing (Treejack) + first-click (Chalkmark) plus qualitative (Reframer) and surveys, with an own participant panel — route here when the job is pure information architecture and you want the benchmark analysis (its edge is IA depth/rigor), or to compare against UXtweak's broader all-in-one battery; note it's also UI-first/no API and higher-entry-priced with a Starter study-launch cap. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-optimalworkshop -a claude-code
/sales-validatethat — The budget, MCP-native IA/usability micro-tool: the same card-sort/tree-test battery far cheaper (Free tier → ~$19/mo Starter), plus an Idea-Validation Engine and — unlike UXtweak — an MCP server (run studies from Claude/Cursor), on-site embeddable studies, and Prolific recruitment (no own panel); route here when price or agent-driven workflows matter more than a built-in panel and breadth (it still has no REST API/webhooks). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-validatethat -a claude-code
/sales-uxarmy — The APAC-panel twin of UXtweak (same card sort / tree test / unmoderated / moderated battery) — route here when the study targets Asia-Pacific users, or when UXtweak's panel minimum spend is the blocker: UXArmy sells pooled credits priced per response by method, with card-sort/tree-test responses at a fraction of a credit, so a large IA study runs on its free tier. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-uxarmy -a claude-code
/sales-idea-validation — The tool-agnostic validate-before-building method + the full research/usability/validator tool landscape (use this to actually decide build-or-not; a passing usability test is not demand). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-idea-validation -a claude-code
/sales-great-question — The all-in-one research-ops peer (recruit → run any method → repository) that, unlike UI-only UXtweak, exposes a REST API + webhooks + MCP; pick it when you need an end-to-end research operation with automation. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-great-question -a claude-code
/sales-userintuition — The API/webhook/MCP-native real-human interview peer — the pick when you need a programmatic research pipeline UXtweak can't offer. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-userintuition -a claude-code
/sales-customer-feedback — Real-customer NPS/CSAT/VoC strategy across tools (use to analyze existing feedback; UXtweak proactively runs new usability tests). Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-customer-feedback -a claude-code
/sales-funnel — Build the smoke-test / fake-door landing page that turns a design hypothesis into a real demand test. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-funnel -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: "Users can't find things in my site's menu — what should I run?"
User says: "People keep missing our pricing page in the nav. How do I test the menu structure in UXtweak?"
Skill does: Recommends a tree test (findability of the nav without visual design — measures
success rate + the first-click path to each destination), optionally paired with an open card sort
first if the labels/categories themselves are in question. Explains how to read the pietree and
findability score, suggests ~30+ participants for a stable result, and notes recruiting a small sample
from your own users (recruiting widget) beats the panel's minimum spend. Adds that a clean tree
test proves the nav works, not that the offer sells.
Result: The user runs a tree test with the right participant count and reads the pietree correctly.
Example 2: "How do I get UXtweak results into Notion / my warehouse automatically?" (developer/automation)
User says: "I want every completed study's results to flow into our data warehouse and a Notion page."
Skill does: States plainly that UXtweak is UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP — so
there's no automated REST path. The data-out options are manual CSV/PDF export and native
integrations: the Notion integration (embed/upload study results) covers the Notion half, but the
warehouse leg is a manual CSV export or an ETL over the exported file. If a live programmatic pipeline is
a hard requirement, routes to /sales-userintuition (REST API + HMAC webhooks + MCP) as the API-native
alternative, noting the trade-off (that's interviews, not UXtweak's unmoderated IA/usability battery).
Result: The user stops hunting for an API that doesn't exist and wires up Notion + a manual export.
Example 3: "Is the free plan enough, or do I have to pay to recruit testers?"
User says: "I'm a solo founder. Can I do a real card sort on the free plan, and how much are participants?"
Skill does: Lays out the free-tier caps as best-effort — ~15 responses/month with per-tool
limits (card sorting ~10 responses / 20 cards / 2 tasks), 1 active study, 14-day retention, and no
User Panel / session recording / live interviews. Explains the panel carries a minimum spend
(~$200), so for a solo founder the economical path is recruiting your own audience via the
recruiting widget or own-database import (free to bring), and points to uxtweak.com/pricing to
confirm current numbers. Flags every figure as best-effort.
Result: The founder runs a small card sort within free-tier limits using self-recruited testers.
Troubleshooting
"Which study type do I use — card sort or tree test?"
Symptom: The user isn't sure whether to test categories/labels or navigation findability.
Cause: The two answer different IA questions and are easy to confuse.
Solution: Use card sorting when the question is how users would group and name content (open =
let them create/label categories to discover a structure; closed = sort into your categories to
validate them). Use tree testing when the structure exists and the question is whether users can
find a given item in it (findability + first-click path, no visual design). Run the card sort to
design the tree, then the tree test to validate it. Read the card sort via the similarity matrix /
dendrogram, the tree test via the pietree and success/directness scores.
"The free plan won't let me collect more responses / run a second study"
Symptom: Responses stop being recorded, or a new study won't go live.
Cause: The Free plan caps ~15 responses/month with per-tool limits and allows 1 active
study at a time, with 14-day result retention.
Solution: Close/finish the current study to free the single active-study slot, export results within
the 14-day window (CSV/PDF) before they age out, and if you need more volume or session recording / the
User Panel / live interviews, that's a Business upgrade (best-effort ~€92/mo annual) — confirm
current caps and price at uxtweak.com/pricing.
"How do I automate exports / connect UXtweak to my stack?"
Symptom: The user wants results flowing into a CRM, warehouse, or Slack automatically.
Cause: UXtweak has no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP — it's UI-only (verify against current
docs; this can change).
Solution: Use manual CSV/PDF export for ad-hoc handoff, or the native integrations for
analysis/repository (Figma import; push to Dovetail / Condens / Marvin / Notion; export files/recordings
to Google Drive / OneDrive; deploy the snippet via Google Tag Manager). If an automated,
programmatic pipeline is a requirement, use an API-native research tool instead — route to
/sales-userintuition (REST API + HMAC-signed webhooks + MCP server).
