Catalog
getsentry/replay-ux-research

getsentry

replay-ux-research

Analyze Sentry session replays to surface UX patterns, pain points, and user journeys for a given product area. Use when asked to "show me how users use", "day in the life", "UX research", "replay research", "how do customers use", "what's the user experience like for", "watch replays of", "analyze replays for", "user behavior on", or "replay UX audit" for any Sentry product surface.

global
New~2.3k
v1.0Saved Jul 11, 2026

Replay UX Research

Analyze session replays from real external users of sentry.io to surface UX patterns, pain points, and representative journeys for a given product area. This uses Sentry's own dogfooding org.

Inputs

$ARGUMENTS is the product area to research (e.g., "issues", "traces", "dashboards", "replays", "monitors", "releases", "alerts").

If $ARGUMENTS is empty, ask the user which product area to research.

Prerequisites

This skill requires the Sentry MCP server to be connected. The following tools are used:

  • search_events — Search for session replays
  • get_replay_details — Get detailed replay information
  • search_issues — Look up error issues
  • get_sentry_resource — Fetch issue details from URLs

If these tools are not available, ask the user to connect the Sentry MCP server before proceeding.

Step 1: Map product area to URL patterns

Read references/product-areas.md and find the URL patterns for the requested area.

If the product area is not listed, infer a URL pattern from the area name. Most Sentry product areas follow the pattern /<area-name>/ in the URL path. The reference file may not cover newer product areas — confirm your assumption with the user if unclear.

Step 2: Search for replays

Search for replays from external (non-Sentry-employee) users. 25 replays is a good starting point — go deeper if the product area is complex, if early patterns are ambiguous, or if the user wants a more comprehensive picture.

Start with last 24 hours — extend to 48h or 7d if needed to reach your target count. Run multiple search_events calls if needed. Use limit: 50 per call.

If you can't find enough replays (fewer than 10 even at 7 days), tell the user what you found and ask them to help iterate — they may suggest broader URL patterns, a different time range, or a related product area to include.

Query construction:

Use natural language queries like:

replays from the last 24 hours where url contains "/<area-path>" excluding user emails ending in @sentry.io and @getsentry.com

Key filters:

  • Time range: last 24 hours (extend if needed)
  • URL pattern: match the product area paths from Step 1
  • Exclude employees: -user.email:*@sentry.io -user.email:*@getsentry.com
  • Environment: prod

Do NOT pass a projectSlug filter — replays span the whole org.

Step 3: Get replay details

Call get_replay_details for each replay found in Step 2. Run these calls in parallel batches for speed.

For each replay, capture:

  • User: email domain only (the API returns full emails — never include these in output)
  • Journey: ordered list of pages visited (from URLs and activity breadcrumbs)
  • Duration: total session length
  • Replay type: session (randomly sampled from normal browsing) vs buffer (triggered by an event — error, manual flush, or specific user action like submitting feedback or going through checkout). Note this distinction in your analysis since buffer replays are biased toward error/action moments, not typical browsing.
  • Entry context: first URL tells you how they arrived — look for referrer signals like referrer=slack, notification_uuid, alert_rule_id in query params (Slack notification), email link patterns, or bare URLs (bookmark/direct nav)
  • Engagement signals: error count, rage clicks, dead clicks, warning count
  • Browser/OS/Device: for device distribution context
  • Activity breadcrumbs: page views, navigation patterns, key interactions

Step 4: Investigate significant errors

After collecting replay details, identify errors that appear in multiple replays or seem likely to affect the user experience. For each significant error:

  1. Triage by frequency: If the same issue ID (e.g., JAVASCRIPT-33RM) appears in 3+ replays, it's worth investigating.

  2. Check the issue in Sentry: Use search_issues to find the issue, or get_sentry_resource with the issue URL from the replay details. Understand:

    • What is the error? (message, stack trace context)
    • How many total users/events does it affect? (beyond just this replay sample)
    • Is it assigned or being worked on?
  3. Infer user-facing impact from behavioral signals: We cannot see the rendered page content through replay metadata — only by watching the replay in-browser. Instead, infer impact from what users did after the error:

    • Retried the same action → they likely saw a failure and tried again
    • Navigated away immediately → they were blocked or gave up
    • Continued their flow normally → the error may be silent/cosmetic
    • Rage-clicked or dead-clicked after → the UI may have become unresponsive
    • Spent a long time on the page after → they may be reading an error message or confused
    • No behavioral change at all → error was likely invisible to the user
  4. Classify each error based on this evidence:

    • Likely blocking: Error + user retried/left/couldn't continue. High confidence of user impact.
    • Likely degrading: Error + user continued but with unusual behavior. Moderate confidence.
    • Likely silent: Error fired but user behavior was unaffected. Low confidence of user impact.
    • Unclear: Not enough behavioral signal to judge. Flag for manual replay review.

    Always note the confidence level and recommend watching specific replays to confirm. Link directly to the replay URL for each classified error.

Include this classification in the Friction & Pain Points section. Don't report likely-silent errors as pain points — list them in a separate "Background Errors (likely silent)" subsection for completeness.

Step 5: Analyze patterns

Look at the replays through these UX research lenses:

Behavioral patterns

  1. Common journeys: What navigation paths do users take? What's the typical flow?
  2. Entry points: How do users arrive? Categorize: alert notification (Slack/email), direct bookmark, organic navigation from another page. The first URL's query params reveal this.
  3. Task completion: Did the user appear to accomplish a goal, or did they wander/abandon? Signs of completion: navigating to a detail view then leaving. Signs of abandonment: short session, back-and-forth navigation, leaving from the same page they entered.
  4. Time on task: How long do users spend on key pages before acting?

Friction & discovery

  1. Friction signals: Rage clicks, dead clicks, errors — but also hesitation (visiting the same page repeatedly), thrashing (rapid back-and-forth between pages), and retry loops (repeating the same action sequence).
  2. Feature discovery: Are users finding sub-features (filters, search, sort, bulk actions) or only using the primary view? Look at URL query params and breadcrumbs for evidence of feature use.
  3. User intent signals: Mine URL query params for search terms, filter values, sort orders, and date ranges users set. These are the closest thing to verbatim user "quotes" — they reveal what users are looking for in their own words. (e.g., query=is%3Aunresolved+assigned%3Ame tells you the user is triaging their own assigned issues.)
  4. Workarounds: Any unexpected navigation patterns that suggest a missing feature or confusing flow? (e.g., going to settings mid-task, opening multiple pages in sequence that could be one view)
  5. Error recovery: When users encounter errors, do they recover and continue or abandon?

Context

  1. Replay trigger mix: What proportion are session (random sample) vs buffer (event-triggered)? Buffer replays show moments where something notable happened (error, feedback submission, checkout, etc.) — they're valuable for friction analysis but aren't representative of typical browsing. Call out this bias when drawing conclusions.
  2. Return visitors: Do any email domains appear in multiple replays? Repeat visitors suggest habitual usage — their journeys may reveal power-user patterns or persistent pain points they've learned to work around.
  3. User diversity: Are replays from many different orgs/companies or concentrated? Are there differences in behavior by org?
  4. Device/browser distribution: What are users primarily using?
  5. Drop-off points: Where do users leave or navigate away?

Step 6: Write the report

Use the template in references/output-template.md. Be specific — cite individual replays as evidence for each pattern. Link to replay URLs so the reader can watch the replay themselves.

Privacy: Never include full user email addresses in the report. Use anonymized identifiers like "user from [company domain]" or "User A, B, C."

Files3
3 files · 18.7 KB

Select a file to preview

Overall Score

86/100

Grade

A

Excellent

Safety

88

Quality

85

Clarity

89

Completeness

82

Summary

This skill guides an agent to analyze Sentry session replays to extract UX patterns, pain points, and user journeys for a specific Sentry product area. It relies on a connected Sentry MCP server and follows a structured 6-step process: mapping product areas to URL patterns, searching for replays, extracting details, investigating errors, analyzing patterns, and generating a research report with templates provided.

Detected Capabilities

MCP server integration (Sentry tools)Session replay search and retrievalError investigation via Sentry APIData analysis and pattern synthesisReport generation from templatesURL pattern matching and inference

Trigger Keywords

Phrases that MCP clients use to match this skill to user intent.

replay UX researchanalyze user sessionsuser journey patternsUX pain pointssession replay analysisuser behavior researchreplay insightshow users interact

Risk Signals

INFO

Handles full user email addresses from API responses, but skill explicitly instructs to anonymize and never include in output

Step 3 (Get replay details) and Privacy note in Step 6
INFO

References external Sentry org data (sentry.io) and uses Sentry's own dogfooding org for research

Description and Step 2 context
INFO

Accesses URL query parameters and search terms entered by users, which may contain sensitive search values

Step 5 (User intent signals) and Step 3 (Entry context)

Referenced Domains

External domains referenced in skill content, detected by static analysis.

www.apache.org

Use Cases

  • Understand how users interact with a specific Sentry product area
  • Identify UX friction points and pain points from real user behavior
  • Analyze user journeys and navigation patterns in session replays
  • Investigate errors affecting user experience and their severity
  • Surface user intent through search queries and filter usage
  • Create research reports documenting user behavior and recommendations

Quality Notes

  • Excellent scope definition: skill is narrowly focused on UX research via replays, not broad assistant behavior
  • Comprehensive guidance on filtering: explicitly excludes employees (@sentry.io, @getsentry.com), specifies time range strategy, and documents URL pattern mapping
  • Strong privacy controls: instructs agent to anonymize emails, use domain-only identifiers, and provides output template with privacy guidelines
  • Well-structured step-by-step workflow: each step has clear inputs, outputs, and success criteria
  • Good handling of failure modes: addresses insufficient replay count by asking for user iteration, not silently proceeding with low-quality data
  • Error classification framework is nuanced: distinguishes blocking, degrading, and silent errors using behavioral signals rather than just presence of errors
  • Reference files are provided (product-areas.md, output-template.md) with practical examples and tables
  • Clear guidance on bias acknowledgment: explicitly notes session vs buffer replay differences and instructs agent to call out sampling bias in reports
  • Good guardrails on tool availability: prerequisites section checks for Sentry MCP server before proceeding
  • Query construction examples are concrete and properly formatted for the search API
Model: claude-haiku-4-5-20251001Analyzed: Jul 11, 2026

Reviews

Add this skill to your library to leave a review.

No reviews yet

Be the first to share your experience.

Add getsentry/replay-ux-research to your library

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...