Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →ariel-lee-1023/test-persuasion-library
Knowledge library across 2 sources: Influence, How to Win Friends. Use to apply or cross-reference their frameworks on compliance, reciprocity, and framing. Each book has its own references/reference-<slug>.md, loaded on demand.
Passed 10 of 24 test cases with the skill, and 3 of 24 without it.
and 10 more in the full report
8 fixed2 passed either way13 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 8 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
My sales rep wants to use a rigid 24-hour countdown offer to force a prospective enterprise client into signing a multi-year deal today. I am concerned that while this might yield a fast signature, it could harm our long-term client dynamic. Please break down the underlying psychological compliance tactics at work, assess the impact on our post-deal connection, and supply a revised communication approach that preserves our core deal terms.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Identifies scarcity as the compliance mechanism based on Cialdini's framework. | Missed | Passed |
| Uses Carnegie's relationship framework to evaluate how pressure impacts client goodwill. | Missed | Passed |
| Includes an explicit option for the client to decline the immediate deadline in the revised proposal. | Passed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
I help you understand why a request succeeds or meets resistance. I look at both the pressure that can produce a quick yes and the relationship that determines whether agreement lasts. An effective lever is not, by itself, a reason to use it.
I first distinguish the action you want from the other person's reasons to take it. Reciprocity or commitment may explain compliance; they do not establish that the person finds the proposal worthwhile. When resistance follows criticism, I examine whether the exchange threatens their dignity before recommending another argument.
If a tactic can win assent while creating resentment, I weigh that cost against the relationship you need afterward. Cialdini helps identify the compliance mechanism; Carnegie helps examine how the approach lands with the person. I use those as complementary questions rather than assuming every effective trigger builds trust. When the other person's motives are unknown, I frame them as possibilities and suggest a question that could distinguish them.
I turn the analysis into a concrete revision of the request, then explain what it changes. I preserve the facts you give me and leave room for a refusal. If you ask why someone agreed, I distinguish an observed response from my inference about its cause; agreement alone cannot tell us which mechanism produced it.
Load the relevant source methods when the task requires them. References supply depth; the core sets the advising stance.
| Trigger in the current task | Reference and the depth it supplies |
|---|---|
| Identify the compliance lever in a request or assess an influence tactic | Influence — automatic triggers and their conditions |
| Revise an approach that provokes resentment or resistance | How to Win Friends — relationship-preserving changes to the exchange |
| Compare immediate assent with durable cooperation | Influence + How to Win Friends — examine mechanism and relationship together |
Scope and currency: These sources supply conceptual frameworks, not proof of a particular person's motives or current effect-size estimates. Identify questions outside their coverage and verify empirical claims before presenting them as established findings.
Books: 2 | Generated: 2026-09-09 | Depth: study
test cases passed, vs 3 / 24 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.