Lyssna (lyssna.com, formerly UsabilityHub) platform help — a self-serve UX research and usability-testing suite on a 690k+ participant panel: five-second, first-click, preference tests, card sorting, tree testing, prototype (Figma) + live-website tests, surveys, and moderated interviews, plus AI follow-ups and summaries. UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP; data leaves via CSV export or native Figma / calendar / Zoom / Teams integrations. Use when setting up a five-second or first-click test, running a card sort or tree test to fix navigation, testing a Figma prototype with real users, fixing junk 'clicked-through' panel responses with better screeners, hitting the free-plan response cap or study limit, recruiting from the panel vs your own users, or choosing between Lyssna and UXtweak / Maze / UserTesting / Optimal Workshop. Do NOT use for the validate-before-building method or comparing research tools (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API-native research pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
Lyssna (lyssna.com, formerly UsabilityHub) platform help — a self-serve UX research and usability-testing suite on a 690k+ participant panel: five-second, first-click, preference tests, card sorting, tree testing, prototype (Figma) + live-website tests, surveys, and moderated interviews, plus AI follow-ups and summaries. UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP; data leaves via CSV export or native Figma / calendar / Zoom / Teams integrations. Use when setting up a five-second or first-click test, running a card sort or tree test to fix navigation, testing a Figma prototype with real users, fixing junk 'clicked-through' panel responses with better screeners, hitting the free-plan response cap or study limit, recruiting from the panel vs your own users, or choosing between Lyssna and UXtweak / Maze / UserTesting / Optimal Workshop. Do NOT use for the validate-before-building method or comparing research tools (use /sales-idea-validation), or an API-native research pipeline (use /sales-userintuition).
argument-hint
[describe what you need help with in Lyssna]
license
MIT
version
1.0.3
tags
["sales","pre-launch","platform"]
Lyssna Platform Help
Lyssna (lyssna.com, formerly UsabilityHub) is a 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 fast. It bundles the whole battery: quick design tests (five-second, first-click,
preference), IA research (card sorting, tree testing), task-based prototype (Figma import) +
live-website testing, surveys, and moderated interviews (scheduling + optional AI follow-ups
and AI summaries) — recruiting from its 690k+ verified panelor your own users via a share link.
Its peers are UXtweak, Maze, UserTesting, Optimal Workshop; its edge is the large panel, a
usable free plan (3 seats, unlimited quick studies), and a quick-study vs in-depth-study split.
Two things to say almost every time: (1) A task-completion metric is not validated demand — a
high success rate / clean tree test / strong preference tells you the design works, not that strangers
will buy; if they're still deciding whether to build, route the go/no-go to a real behavior test via /sales-idea-validation. (2) Lyssna is UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP, so any
"pipe results into my CRM/warehouse" ask is manual CSV export or a native integration (Figma import;
calendar/Zoom/Teams for interview scheduling), not REST — route real pipelines 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 Lyssna?
A) Pick a test type — five-second / first-click / preference / card sort / tree test / prototype / website / survey / interview
B) Recruit participants — the 690k+ panel (pay-per-use) vs sharing a link with your own users
C) Fix bad results — junk "clicked-through" / "Yes" responses, weak screeners, US-skewed panel
D) Read results / get data out — click maps, first-click accuracy, card-sort similarity, tree-test findability; CSV export (no API)
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 test 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 (Lyssna 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}
Deep think-aloud video recordings (Lyssna's unmoderated tests aren't video-narration-first)
/sales-userbrain {question}
When routing, give the exact command: "This is a {domain} question — run: /sales-idea-validation {original question}"
Otherwise, answer Lyssna-specific questions using Step 3.
Step 3 — Lyssna platform reference
Read references/platform-guide.md for the full reference — the test-type catalog (what each test
measures + how to read its output), the automation-surface table, best-effort pricing/plan gates (Free
15-response cap, Growth in-depth-study limit, pay-per-use panel), the data model, recruiting (panel vs
share-your-own), and the no-API data-out playbook. Lyssna has no public API — 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
Lyssna measures whether a built design/flow works (task success, first-click accuracy,
findability, preference) — 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. Lyssna has no public API, webhooks,
Zapier, or MCP (verify current docs). "Sync results to HubSpot/Snowflake" is a manual CSV export,
or the native Figma (prototype import) and calendar/Zoom/Teams (scheduling) integrations — not
a REST pipeline. If the user needs a programmatic pipeline, tell them so and route to /sales-userintuition.
Fix junk responses with task/screener design first, not by blaming the panel. The top complaint is
fast "clicked-through" answers and "Yes" to open-ended questions. Almost always a design fix: write
goal-based task scenarios with no hints (not opinion questions), add screener + attention/qualifying
questions, and prefer specific closed + one open follow-up over vague "share your thoughts." Lyssna
will credit/replace genuinely bad panel responses if you flag them to support. Also warn the panel
skews US-based, so for non-US/niche audiences tighten screeners or self-recruit via a share link.
Match the test type to the question (full catalog in references/platform-guide.md): five-second
= first impression/recall; first-click = where users click first (predicts task success);
preference = A/B of designs; card sorting = how users group/label content; tree testing =
findability in your nav (no visual design); prototype/website test = task success/time. Don't run a
five-second test for navigation or a tree test to judge visuals.
Warn about the plan limits before they hit them, as best-effort. The Free plan gives 3 seats
and unlimited quick studies but only ~15 self-recruited responses and lacks recordings, AI
follow-ups/summaries, CSV export, conditional logic, and live-website testing. Growth adds those
and 5 in-depth studies/month with unlimited self-recruited responses. Panel participants are
billed pay-per-use on every plan (separate from the subscription — the two costs are easy to
confuse). State all figures as best-effort and point to lyssna.com/pricing.
Set participant counts realistically (rule-of-thumb): ~5 per user group for qualitative usability (task tests, interviews); ~30+ for quantitative tests (first-click, card sort, tree test, preference).
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 response cap, the quick-vs-in-depth split, the pay-per-use panel, and the (absent) API/export surface move; verify at lyssna.com.
Usability ≠ demand. Lyssna 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. Lyssna is UI-only; data-out is manual CSV export or
native integrations (Figma prototype import; calendar / Google Meet / Zoom / Teams for
interview scheduling only — not data export). Don't design a live REST pipeline around it — route
pipeline needs to /sales-userintuition.
Panel quality: fast "clicked-through" and "Yes"-to-everything responses. The #1 gripe — almost
always a task/screener-design problem, not a broken panel: fix with goal-based tasks, screeners,
attention checks, and specific (not "share your thoughts") questions; flag genuinely bad responses to
support for credit/replacement. The panel also skews US-based, so tighten screeners or
self-recruit via a share link for niche/non-US audiences.
Two separate costs, and a capped free plan. The subscription (Free / Growth / Enterprise) and
panel participants (pay-per-use on every plan) are billed separately (self-recruiting via a
share link avoids the panel fee). Free caps ~15 self-recruited responses and gates recordings, AI
follow-ups/summaries, CSV export, conditional logic, and live-website testing — all start on Growth.
"Quick" vs "in-depth" studies drive the limits. Quick studies (five-second/first-click/preference/
card sort/etc.) are unlimited on paid plans; interviews and other in-depth studies are metered
(5/mo on Growth). Plan around that split.
Figma prototype import can be slow or flaky. Large prototypes sometimes stall or fail to import
(reviewers blame the Figma API) — simplify the flow and re-import.
Related skills
/sales-uxtweak — The closest usability + information-architecture peer — the same battery (card sort, tree test, first-click / five-second / preference, prototype/website tests) in one seat, with its own panel; route here to compare the two or when the UI-heavy IA depth (similarity matrix / dendrogram / pietree) matters. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-uxtweak -a claude-code
/sales-userbrain — The video-first think-aloud usability peer — real testers narrate screen + voice while doing your tasks (AI highlights, transcripts, clips); route here when you want to watch people use it and hear why, not Lyssna's quick-test metrics. 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 the user wants that prototype-flow depth; note Useberry has no panel of its own (recruits via Prolific) where Lyssna brings a 690k+ panel. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-useberry -a claude-code
/sales-uxarmy — The APAC-first usability + IA peer (same battery, plus DeepDive moderated dyads/triads/focus groups) — route here when the study targets Asia-Pacific users, where its 20+ country panel beats Lyssna's larger but US/Europe-weighted one; its per-response, per-method credit model also prices card sorts and tree tests at a fraction of a credit. 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-userintuition — The API/webhook/MCP-native real-human interview peer — the pick when you need a programmatic research pipeline Lyssna 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; Lyssna proactively runs new 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-userfeel — The international peer running the same battery (unmoderated + moderated, card sort, tree test, surveys) across 40+ languages / 40+ countries; route here when the market matters more than the free tier — but note Userfeel now sells annual credit plans (~$2,250/yr) rather than the pay-per-test model its reviews still describe. Install: npx skills add sales-skills/sales --skill sales-userfeel -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: "My testers just answer 'Yes' and click through — the feedback is useless"
User says: "I ran a Lyssna test asking people to review my landing page and share thoughts, and half
just said 'Yes' or wrote one word. What am I doing wrong?"
Skill does: Explains this is almost always a task/question-design problem, not a bad panel.
Rewrites the ask as goal-based task scenarios with no hints (e.g. "You want to find the pricing — do
it") plus specific questions and one open follow-up, warns against vague "share your thoughts"
and yes/no wording, and adds a screener + attention check. Notes Lyssna will credit/replace
genuinely low-effort panel responses if flagged, that the panel skews US-based (tighten screeners or
self-recruit), and that even clean feedback proves the design works, not that anyone will pay.
Result: The user rewrites the study, re-runs, and gets substantive, usable feedback.
Example 2: "How do I get Lyssna 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 dashboard."
Skill does: States plainly that Lyssna is UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP — so
there's no automated REST path. Data-out is manual CSV export (Growth+); the native integrations are
Figma (prototype import, inbound) and calendar/Zoom/Teams (interview scheduling, not data
export) — none move result data into a warehouse. If a live pipeline is a hard requirement, routes to
/sales-userintuition (REST API + HMAC webhooks + MCP), noting that's real-human interviews, not
Lyssna's quick-test battery.
Result: The user stops hunting for an API that doesn't exist and sets up a scheduled CSV export/ETL.
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 run a real first-click test on the free plan, and how much are
participants?"
Skill does: Lays out the Free plan (best-effort) — 3 seats, unlimited quick studies, but only
~15 self-recruited responses and no recordings / AI follow-ups / CSV export. Explains the two
separate costs (subscriptionand the panel, pay-per-use on every plan), so the cheapest path is
a first-click test self-recruited via a share link (no panel fee) within the 15-response cap,
upgrading to Growth only for more volume, recordings, or the 5 monthly in-depth studies. Points to
lyssna.com/pricing; flags every figure as best-effort.
Result: The founder runs a first-click test on the free plan with self-recruited testers.
Troubleshooting
"The responses are junk — people just click through as fast as possible"
Symptom: Open-ended answers are one word or "Yes"; feedback is superficial or irrelevant.
Cause: A task/question-design problem (vague or opinion-only prompts invite low-effort answers),
compounded by unqualified panel participants — not usually a broken panel.
Solution: Rewrite as goal-based task scenarios (specific action, no hints), add screener
questions + an attention check, ask specific questions with one open follow-up rather than
"share your thoughts," and keep studies short. Flag genuinely low-effort panel responses to support for
credit/replacement; for non-US or niche audiences tighten screeners or self-recruit via a share link
(the panel skews US-based).
"The free plan won't let me collect more responses / use recordings or export"
Symptom: Responses stop recording around ~15, or recordings / AI summaries / CSV export are locked.
Cause: The Free plan caps self-recruited responses (best-effort ~15) and gates recordings, AI
follow-ups/summaries, CSV export, conditional logic, custom branding, and live-website testing.
Solution: Self-recruit via a share link to stretch the free responses, export/screenshot results
before you need volume, and upgrade to Growth for recordings, AI features, CSV export, live-website
testing, and 5 in-depth studies/month (interviews and other in-depth studies are metered even on
Growth). Confirm current caps and price at lyssna.com/pricing — treat all figures as best-effort.
"How do I automate exports / connect Lyssna to my stack?"
Symptom: The user wants results flowing into a CRM, warehouse, or Slack automatically.
Cause: Lyssna has no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP — it's UI-only (verify current docs).
Solution: Use manual CSV export (Growth+) for ad-hoc handoff or a scheduled ETL over the exported
file. The native integrations — Figma (prototype import) and Google Calendar / Outlook / Google
Meet / Zoom / Teams (interview scheduling only) — don't move result data out. 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).
