About commitment-ladder-design
A design skill for creating small, authentic user commitments that support meaningful goals without pressuring people to defend past choices. It also provides an ethical audit format for evaluating influence cues.
Key features
- 01Commitment-ladder workflow
- 02Influence cue diagnosis
- 03Evidence and risk checks
- 04Ethical rewrite guidance
- 05Anti-patterns and review checklist
Use cases
- 01Planning a sequence of user decisions
- 02Auditing persuasive interface copy
- 03Rewriting pressure-based calls to action
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/After installing, type/commitment-ladder-designin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
guidelines.mdagents/openai.yamlevals/evals.jsonreferences/commitment/checklist.mdexamples.mdknowledge.mdrules.mdsmells.mdworkflows/build-commitment-ladder.mdDetails
From the project READMECommitment Ladder Design
Design commitments that help users act on real intent, not commitments that trap them into defending a decision. The consistency drive is useful when it supports identity-aligned action and risky when it hides changing terms.
Quick Start
- Read
guidelines.mdto choose the smallest useful reference set. - Load
references/commitment/knowledge.mdfor concepts andreferences/commitment/rules.mdfor operating rules. - Use
workflows/build-commitment-ladder.mdfor repeatable tasks. - For audits, surface both the active influence cue and the ethical rewrite.
Contents
| File | Purpose |
|---|---|
| references/commitment/knowledge.md | Core concepts and source-grounded definitions |
| references/commitment/rules.md | Rules, boundaries, and practical guidelines |
| references/commitment/examples.md | Bad/better examples for applied situations |
| references/commitment/smells.md | Red flags and anti-patterns to detect |
| references/commitment/checklist.md | Fast review checklist |
| workflows/build-commitment-ladder.md | Create a sequence of small, authentic commitments that lead toward a meaningful user goal. |
Operating Principles
- Use only honest evidence. Do not invent popularity, scarcity, credentials, endorsements, or social connection.
- Separate helping a good decision from pushing a shortcut response. If the cue is counterfeit, treat it as a red flag.
- When rewriting, preserve user agency: add context, alternatives, and enough time to decide when stakes are meaningful.
Output Pattern
- Diagnosis - name the influence principle or cue.
- Evidence Check - state what proof supports or is missing from the cue.
- Risk - explain manipulation, trust, or decision-quality risk.
- Rewrite or Recommendation - provide an ethical alternative.
Validation
Use the prompts in evals/evals.json as smoke tests. A good result identifies the relevant Influence principle, preserves user agency, and avoids fabricated evidence or coercive pressure.