By name: creative-testing-framework description: Use this skill when the user asks Claude to design a creative testing plan, structure a hook/angle/format test, or decide what to test next. Encodes the principle of isolating one variable per test, batch sizes for statistical confidence, and the iteration cycle that compounds learnings.
Creative Testing Framework
Purpose: Design tests that produce clean signal, not noise. One variable per test. Batch sizes that justify decisions.
THE THREE LEVERS (from Ecom Ops Architect)
Per Jake's Ecom Ops role definition, creative testing consolidates into:
- Hook performance — pattern interrupts, curiosity, pain-first
- Message clarity — tight problem/solution, proof, objection handling
- CTA calibration — soft vs direct, calibrated to funnel temperature
A single test isolates ONE of these three. Never test hook + message + CTA in one ad set — the data won't tell you which moved the needle.
TEST DESIGN PATTERNS
Pattern 1 — Hook Test (most common)
- Hold message, format, CTA constant
- Vary the hook (3-5 variants)
- Run as ads within a single ad set
- Outcome: which hook attribute (pattern interrupt vs pain-first vs proof) wins
Pattern 2 — Angle Test
- Hold hook style constant
- Vary the underlying angle (different avatar/pain/promise)
- Run as separate ad sets
- Outcome: which avatar or angle is biggest market
Pattern 3 — Format Test
- Hold message constant
- Vary format (static vs video vs UGC vs slideshow)
- Run as separate ad sets OR ads within
- Outcome: which format the audience responds to (informs creative production pipeline)
Pattern 4 — Offer Test
- Hold creative constant
- Vary the offer (bonus stack, guarantee terms, urgency mechanism)
- Requires distinct landing pages or PDP variants
- Outcome: which offer mechanic moves CVR
Pattern 5 — Awareness Level Test (Eugene Schwartz)
- Hold avatar constant
- Vary the awareness-level lead (problem-aware → solution-aware → product-aware → most-aware)
- Run as separate ad sets
- Outcome: which awareness stage the cold audience is actually at
BATCH SIZE LOGIC
For statistical confidence on conversion events:
| Spend per ad set | Conversions to expect | Confidence level |
|---|---|---|
| <$100 | Single digits | Anecdotal — kill obvious failures only |
| $100-300 | 5-15 | Directional — kill clear losers, hold middle |
| $300-500 | 15-30 | Confident on extremes — kill bottom, scale top with caveats |
| $500+ | 30+ | Statistical confidence on most decisions |
[VERIFY — these thresholds assume DTC product ~$50-150 AOV. Adjust for high-ticket or low-ticket.]
Rule: Don't make scaling decisions on <15 conversions. The variance is too high.
ITERATION CYCLE (compound learnings)
Test Round 1 → identify winner → Test Round 2 builds on Round 1's winner
Round 1: Test 3 hooks (A, B, C)
Winner: Hook B
Insight: Pain-first hooks outperform curiosity for this avatar
Round 2: Build on Hook B's pattern
Test 3 new pain-first hooks (B-variant-1, B-variant-2, B-variant-3)
Winner: B-variant-2
Insight: Specific pain ("morning hand stiffness") beats general pain ("hand pain")
Round 3: Build on B-variant-2's insight
Test 3 specific-pain hooks across new pain segments
Winner: ...
After 5-6 rounds, you have a hook bank of 10-15 validated patterns instead of 5-6 random tests.
This is how the brand brain compounds — each test answer goes into dtc-second-brain/raw/ads/ and outputs/, then gets pulled into wiki/hooks-that-work.md on next compile.
ANTI-PATTERNS TO AVOID
| Anti-pattern | Why it's wrong |
|---|---|
| Testing 8 hooks in one ad set | No budget per hook reaches statistical confidence |
| Testing hook + format + CTA simultaneously | Can't attribute which variable moved the needle |
| Killing an ad set at $40 spend with 1 purchase | Sample size too small; variance dominates |
| Running the same creative for 30+ days without rotation | Creative fatigue kills CTR; rotate before the curve drops |
| Scaling on Day 3 because hook rate looks good | Hook rate predicts attention, not purchase |
| Testing "different audiences" with the same creative | You're testing audiences, not creative — separate ad set per audience needed |
| Ignoring Meta's auto-optimization | Letting Meta run for 3-5 days before manual intervention gives the algo room to find pockets |
INTEGRATION WITH OTHER MODES
| Mode | Handoff to / from this skill |
|---|---|
creative-strategy |
Provides avatar + angles + necessary beliefs → feed test design |
static-ad-generator |
Generates the creative variants for hook tests |
dtc-second-brain |
Receives test results in raw/ads/, raw/performance/ |
campaign-launcher |
Executes the test plan you design here |
post-launch-analysis |
Reads results back; you redesign the next round |
OUTPUT FORMAT
Write test plan to plans/test-round-<N>-<date>.md:
# Test Round <N> — <Date>
## Hypothesis
[What you're testing and why]
## Variable being isolated
[Hook / Angle / Format / Offer / Awareness Level]
## Held constant
- [Things NOT varied in this test]
## Variants
1. [Variant A — description]
2. [Variant B — description]
3. [Variant C — description]
## Success criteria
- Primary metric: [hook rate / CTR / CPA]
- Threshold: [specific number]
- Decision rule: [what wins, what kills]
## Sample size plan
- Budget per ad set: $X
- Expected conversions: Y
- Duration: Z days
## What this test rules out
[If variant X wins, we'll know it's NOT [hypothesis Y]]
## Next round depends on
[How this test's outcome shapes the next test]