qa-aman/11-star-framework
skills/by-role/pm/11-star-framework/SKILL.md
Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add qa-aman/claude-skills 11-star-frameworkInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 23, 2026, 2:10 PM148.9s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- 11-star-framework
- description:
- Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".
11-Star Experience Framework
Brian Chesky (Airbnb) thought experiment: "What would a 1-star through 11-star experience look like?"
Forces teams to think beyond "good enough" and imagine transformative experiences.
The Scale
| Star Level | Definition | |------------|-----------| | 1-star | Broken, unusable | | 2-star | Barely functional | | 3-star | Meets basic need | | 4-star | Reliable, useful | | 5-star | Delights | | 6-star | Memorable | | 7-star | Magical | | 8-star | Personalized magic | | 9-star | Science fiction | | 10-star | Impossible today | | 11-star | Transforms the domain |
How to Use
Step 1: Rate Your Feature
Describe what each star level looks like for THIS specific feature or product.
Example - E-Commerce Checkout:
| Star | Experience | |------|-----------| | 1-star | Page crashes; payment fails silently; user gives up | | 3-star | Checkout works; basic form fields; no saved payment methods | | 5-star | One-click checkout; saved cards; instant confirmation with ETA | | 7-star | Predicts what you want before you search; auto-applies best discount; delivery arrives same day | | 9-star | Knows you need something before you do; orders it; perfect every time | | 11-star | Commerce friction doesn't exist - things you need appear when you need them |
Step 2: Choose Target
- Below 5-star: Acceptable for MVP, communicate clearly
- 5-7 star: Sweet spot for v1 release
- Above 7-star: Aspirational; roadmap for future
Step 3: Use as Scope Filter
- "4-star to 5-star?" - Worth it
- "5-star to 5.2-star?" - Probably not
- "Gets us to 7-star" - Realistic for current phase?
Common Benchmarks
These benchmarks apply across product categories. Adapt the specific examples to your domain.
| Domain | 3-star | 5-star | 7-star | |--------|--------|--------|--------| | Onboarding | Basic docs with commands | Guided walkthrough, validation at each step, troubleshooting | Interactive course, adapts to user's level | | Documentation | Single page covering basics | Multi-page docs, examples, architecture guide | Inline help, contextual guidance, video walkthroughs | | Output quality | Raw data dump | Rich formatting, severity indicators, actionable next steps | Trend tracking, executive summaries, copy-paste actions | | Extensibility | Hardcoded defaults | Config file, multiple output formats | Plugin system, custom extensions, API access | | Trust & safety | No explanation of what runs | Permissions documented, read-only by default | Dry-run default, full audit trail, airgapped mode |
Output Format
When rating a project or feature:
| Star Level | Experience Description | Realistic Now? | |------------|----------------------|----------------| | 1-star | [broken version] | -- | | 3-star | [basic version] | -- | | 5-star | [delightful version] | Yes/No | | 7-star | [magical version] | Yes/No | | 9-star | [sci-fi version] | No | | 11-star | [transformative version] | No |
Target Star Level: {N} - {rationale}
Dimension-by-Dimension Rating
For a thorough audit, rate each dimension independently:
| Dimension | Rating | Evidence | |-----------|--------|----------| | Onboarding | X.X | [specific evidence] | | Documentation | X.X | [specific evidence] | | Output quality | X.X | [specific evidence] | | Trust & safety | X.X | [specific evidence] | | Extensibility | X.X | [specific evidence] | | Code quality | X.X | [specific evidence] |
Then identify:
- Strengths that push above 5-star (numbered list with evidence)
- Remaining gaps to next star level (table with gap, impact)
- Path to next star level (prioritized action items)
Anti-Patterns
1. Rating everything 3-star Bad: Defaulting every dimension to "meets basic need" without investigating actual behavior Good: Test the real experience, check edge cases, rate based on evidence not assumptions
2. Skipping dimensions Bad: Rating only the dimensions you feel confident about, ignoring the rest Good: Rate every dimension. Gaps in your knowledge are themselves evidence of a lower rating (if you can't tell, the user probably can't either)
3. Aspirational scoring Bad: "We plan to add X next sprint" bumps the rating from 3 to 5 Good: Rate what exists today. Plans are roadmap items, not current-state evidence
4. Flat improvement list Bad: "Improve onboarding, improve docs, improve output" with no priority Good: Rank by impact - which gap, if closed, moves the overall experience up a full star level?
5. Ignoring the 1-star description Bad: Jumping straight to 5-star and above Good: Describing the 1-star experience grounds the team in what "broken" actually looks like and makes higher ratings more calibrated
Related Skills
qa-aman/webinar-planner
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Plan a webinar end-to-end using April Dunford's Obviously Awesome positioning framework to find the topic angle that makes the webinar obviously valuable to the right audience. Produces topic positioning, abstract, speaker brief, registration page, promotion sequence, day-of run-of-show, and post-webinar follow-up. Use when the user asks to plan a webinar, virtual event, online workshop, "we need a webinar on X", host a webinar, online masterclass, or any live virtual event with promotion and follow-up. Reads ICP, services, and brand voice from knowledge/.
13SKILL.mdUpdated May 5, 2026
qa-aman/thought-leadership-writer
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Write long-form thought leadership articles, opinion pieces, industry POV essays, and CEO/founder bylines using the Made to Stick SUCCESs framework (Chip and Dan Heath). Use when the user asks for a long-form article, executive byline, opinion piece, industry POV, manifesto, "explain our point of view on X", or wants to publish an authority-building piece (1200-2500 words). Reads brand voice and positioning from knowledge/.
13SKILL.mdUpdated May 5, 2026
qa-aman/social-calendar
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Plan a monthly content calendar across channels using the Content Marketing Matrix (Dave Chaffey, Smart Insights) - Entertain/Inspire/Educate/Convince. Every post gets a quadrant label. The monthly calendar must hit 40% Educate, 40% Inspire+Convince, 20% Entertain. Produces a week-by-week posting schedule with topics, formats, channels, and asset links. Use when the user says "content calendar", "social calendar", "plan next month's content", "what should we post", "content plan", "editorial calendar", "schedule posts for the month", or wants a structured posting plan for LinkedIn, Twitter, email, or blog. Reads brand voice, ICP, and past learnings from knowledge/.
13SKILL.mdUpdated May 5, 2026
qa-aman/seo-article-writer
development
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Write SEO-optimized long-form articles targeting specific keywords using the They Ask You Answer Big 5 framework (Marcus Sheridan). Articles are categorized by Big 5 type (Cost, Problems, Versus, Best/Reviews, How-To) and structured accordingly. The "answer first" rule applies to every article. Use when the user asks for an SEO article, blog post for ranking, "rank for keyword X", organic content, search-optimized post, pillar page, or content for organic traffic. Includes keyword targeting, search intent matching, internal linking suggestions, and meta tags.
13SKILL.mdUpdated May 5, 2026