Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →asgard-ai-platform/algo-price-conjoint
Run conjoint analysis to measure how product attributes drive consumer preferences and willingness to pay.
Passed 22 of 23 test cases with the skill, and 16 of 23 without it.
and 11 more in the full report
7 fixed15 passed either way0 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 7 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
Process choice data for a coffee subscription study with attributes Roast (Light, Dark), Origin (Single-Origin, Blend), and Price ($12, $18). Surveyed 250 respondents with HB model and 0.75 holdout hit rate. Output the complete JSON structure adhering strictly to the schema rules.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| JSON output contains exact top-level keys attribute_importance, part_worths, wtp, and metadata. | Missed | Passed |
| Attribute importance is structured as a list of objects with attribute and importance_pct keys. | Missed | Passed |
| Metadata dictionary contains respondents, model, and holdout_hit_rate. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Conjoint analysis estimates the relative value consumers place on product attributes by analyzing their choices among hypothetical product profiles. Choice-Based Conjoint (CBC) is the most common variant. Produces part-worth utilities per attribute level and derived willingness-to-pay estimates.
Trigger conditions:
When NOT to use:
IRON LAW: Conjoint Results Are Valid ONLY for Tested Attribute Levels
Extrapolating beyond tested ranges is unreliable. If you tested
prices $10-$50, you cannot predict preference at $100. The utility
function is only defined within the experimental design space.
Define: attributes (3-7), levels per attribute (2-5 each), design type (full factorial if small, fractional/D-optimal if large). Survey 200+ respondents minimum. Gate: Attributes independent, levels realistic, sample size sufficient.
Check: holdout task prediction accuracy (hit rate > 60%), signs of part-worths are logical (higher price → lower utility). Gate: Holdout hit rate acceptable, utilities directionally correct.
test cases passed, vs 16 / 23 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.