skills/sales-lyssna/SKILL.md
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).
npx skillsauth add sales-skills/sales sales-lyssnaInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
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 panel or 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.
If references/learnings.md exists, read it first for accumulated platform knowledge.
Ask only what you can't infer:
Skip-ahead: if the user's prompt already names the test type and their question is specific, go to Step 3.
| 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.
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.
/sales-idea-validation./sales-userintuition.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.If you discover a gotcha or tip not in references/learnings.md, append it there with today's date.
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.
/sales-idea-validation./sales-userintuition./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-codeUser 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.
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.
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 (subscription and 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.
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).
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.
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).
tools
Wizlogo (wizlogo.com) platform help — a budget online logo maker (template/style-variation, marketed as "AI") plus a hub of FREE branding tools (business-name, blog-name and slogan generators, business-card maker, invoice generator, color converter, domain search). The pricing traps: the FREE logo is PERSONAL-USE-ONLY; the two cheap paid tiers are RASTER PNG/JPG only — Single (~€39.99 one-time) and Unlimited (~€3.99 per WEEK, recurring) — and VECTOR (SVG/PDF/EPS) is gated to the ~€299.99 Enterprise tier, which also bundles human designer edits and a social kit. Transparent PNG is on all paid plans. Use when making a Wizlogo logo, understanding free-vs-paid or personal-vs-commercial use, which tier unlocks vector/SVG for print, the weekly-subscription billing trap, its free name/slogan generators, or whether it has an API (UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier or MCP). Do NOT use to just generate the business name (use /sales-namelix) or to compare/validate branding tools (use /sales-idea-validation).
tools
VistaPrint platform help (vistaprint.com, a Cimpress company) — the small-business design + print + digital-marketing platform: a free AI Logomaker (4 generations, 60 more after free sign-up) exporting SVG/PNG/PDF at 4000x4000 with no watermark, a free Brand Kit, business cards/flyers/signage/apparel/promo print, and a website builder. THE RIGHTS TRAP: VistaPrint states NO intellectual-property rights transfer on an AI-generated logo — you get usage rights but CANNOT register it for trademark or copyright; only its human designer service transfers full IP. Use when making a VistaPrint logo, asking if you own or can trademark it, running out of AI logo credits, printed colors not matching the screen, bleed/DPI/font file-prep rejections, or asking whether VistaPrint has an API (the consumer site does not — automation runs through the parent Cimpress Open partner-fulfilment API). Do NOT use for Vista Social scheduling (use /sales-vistasocial) or comparing logo tools market-wide (use /sales-idea-validation).
tools
Turbologo (turbologo.com) platform help — a budget AI/DIY logo maker: enter a business name + industry, pick icons and colors, and it proposes logo concepts you refine in an in-browser editor, then pay a one-time fee to download (designing is free, previews are watermarked, downloading is the paywall). Vector SVG/PDF is gated to the mid tier and up; the top tier adds a brand kit (business cards, letterheads, email signatures, social assets). Use when generating a logo in Turbologo, choosing which download tier to buy, vector SVG vs raster PNG, removing the free watermark, the time-limited edit-after-purchase window, pay-to-download pricing questions, whether an AI logo is yours to trademark, or whether Turbologo has an API to bulk-generate logos (it is UI-only — no public API, webhooks, Zapier, or MCP). Do NOT use to generate the business name (use /sales-namelix), compare or validate branding tools across the market (use /sales-idea-validation), or build wider marketing creative (use /sales-canva).
tools
Online Logo Maker (onlinelogomaker.com) platform help — a long-standing free/freemium DIY logo maker: build the mark yourself from icons, shapes, text, and fonts — MANUAL/template-based, NOT enter-a-name-get-AI-concepts. The free pack downloads a LOW-RES 300px PNG with a background; vector SVG, transparent PNG, and 2000px high-res are gated to a one-time lifetime Premium pack (not a subscription). The free tier's commercial-use rights are disputed by reviewers — clean ownership effectively needs Premium, and a shared-icon mark can be non-distinctive. Use for building/editing a logo here, free download vs Premium, vector SVG or transparent PNG, one-time pricing, commercial-use/trademark terms, near-namesake confusion (NOT LogoMaker.com / LogoMakr / Logomakerr.ai), or whether it has an API (UI-only — no API, webhooks, Zapier, MCP). Do NOT use to generate the business name (use /sales-namelix), compare branding tools across the market (use /sales-idea-validation), or build wider creative (use /sales-canva).