Update to Ecommerce Skills

{
  "description": "Use when planning how to get product reviews or feedback, when to ask, what to do about the average rating, or how to respond to reviews and public complaints — e.g. \"when should we send the review request\", \"should we remove this 1-star review\", \"how do we reply to this complaint\", \"we need more reviews\", \"our rating is 4.9\".",
  "included_files": [
    {
      "relative_path": "reference.md",
      "size_in_bytes": 6070
    }
  ],
  "name": "reviews",
  "skill_md_contents": "---\nname: reviews\ndescription: Use when planning how to get product reviews or feedback, when to ask, what to do about the average rating, or how to respond to reviews and public complaints — e.g. \"when should we send the review request\", \"should we remove this 1-star review\", \"how do we reply to this complaint\", \"we need more reviews\", \"our rating is 4.9\".\n---\n\n# Reviews\n\nGet more reviews and answer complaints in a way that wins over the people watching. Counterintuitive parts: an imperfect rating sells more than a perfect one, asking too soon reduces reviews, and the best first question is not \"rate us\".\n\n## When to use\n\n- The review-request email or sequence\n- A negative review or a too-perfect average\n- Replying to a public complaint\n- A product launch that needs a healthy review profile\n\n## When not to use\n\n- Referral mechanics → `referrals`\n- Loyalty, returns, packaging → `post-purchase`\n\n## Inputs\n\nCollect, or state your assumption:\n\n- Product and how long it takes to judge (instant: soda; slow: skincare, a course)\n- Current ask timing and wording; average rating; reviews the user wants to remove\n- Whether reviews get replies; complaint volume, channel, and tone (polite vs rude)\n\n## Procedure\n\n1. **Ask at 9–13 days** after purchase or delivery. A request at 24 hours *reduced* reviews, worst among younger customers. Earlier only for products judged instantly; later for products that take weeks to evaluate.\n2. **Lead with a positive open-ended question.** Before any rating: \"What did you enjoy most about [product]?\" (free text). Responders spent 131% more afterward; even receiving the request helps. Usual questions follow. Automate it.\n3. **Never gate the public review by score.** Routing low scores to a private form and high scores to the review site is unsupported by the evidence and treated as deceptive by regulators (US FTC, UK CMA). Everyone gets the same path.\n4. **Get reviews in early at launch.** Ask *all* early customers as soon as step 1 allows — the same path for everyone, no picking the happy ones (that is selective solicitation, see step 3). The point is speed: a negative first review left the average 0.29 stars lower a year later on Amazon and Best Buy, so make sure the first review isn't left to chance by waiting.\n5. **Leave the imperfection.** 4.0–4.5 stars sells more than 4.5–5.0; perfect looks suspicious. A negative review irrelevant to most buyers helps: an espresso machine with four 5-stars rated 16% better with an irrelevant 1-star added. † Reply; don't remove.\n6. **Reply to every review.** When companies started responding, ratings rose 0.12 stars and review volume 12%.\n7. **Public complaints: once, fast, warm, then private.** You're replying to everyone reading, not the complainer. Reply fast and only once: empathy, an explanation if you have one, a private channel to continue. Replied-to posts get boosted on X and LinkedIn, so that one reply is what people see. High volume → a separate support account.\n8. **Rude complaints: humor about the situation, never the person.** Onlookers engaged more and were 18.3% more likely to buy than with no response. If it isn't funny, use step 7.\n9. **Describe the product as an experience** in copy (people sharing coffee, not bean origin) — such products collect more reviews. †\n\n## Output\n\n1. Solicitation plan: trigger, day offset, first question, follow-ups.\n2. Rating policy: what to leave, reply wording for an irrelevant negative.\n3. Templates: public complaint reply with private handoff; rude-complaint reply with situational humor; positive-review reply.\n\n## Common mistakes\n\n- Asking 1 day after delivery — reduces reviews; 9–13 days.\n- Opening with \"rate 1–5\" — open with what they enjoyed most.\n- Score-gating — unsupported and legally risky.\n- Removing an irrelevant 1-star — it makes the rest credible.\n- Protecting a 4.9 — 4.0–4.5 sells more.\n- Replying to a complaint repeatedly in public — once, then private.\n\n## Quick reference\n\n| Situation | Do |\n|---|---|\n| Request timing | 9–13 days (earlier if judged instantly, later if slow) |\n| First question | \"What did you enjoy most?\" |\n| Launch | Ask all early customers promptly; same path for everyone |\n| Average rating | 4.0–4.5; leave irrelevant negatives |\n| All reviews | Reply to each |\n| Public complaint | One fast empathetic reply → private |\n| Rude complaint | Humor about the situation |\n\n† No primary citation on file for this rule — a practitioner tip, not a measured finding.\n\nEvidence and effect sizes: see [reference.md](reference.md).\n"
}