Templates · Design
Usability test script template
Moderator script with tasks and observation notes
Start with this template →Sign in
Opens on reph with the template ready to start. No account needed; sign in to keep your document.
Filled example
The template filled in for a made-up company, so you can see what good looks like.
Usability test script: Refund flow prototype
Author: Kofi Mensah · Date: 28 October 2026
Intro script
"Thanks for making time. We're testing the design, not you. There's no wrong way to use it, and if something's confusing that's useful information, not a mistake on your part. Please think out loud as you go. Okay to record this session?"
Warm-up questions
- What do you currently do when a patient asks for money back?
- Walk me through the last time you handled a refund or an overpayment.
Tasks
Task 1
Scenario: "Imagine a patient has just come out of a 30 minute session that was booked and paid as 60 minutes. She's at the desk and asks for the difference back. Please sort that out for her."
Success criteria: A partial refund of £35.00 is sent to the original card, without help, in under three minutes.
Observation notes: P3 typed 35 in the amount field but hesitated at the confirmation, reading the card number aloud twice.
Task 2
Scenario: "A patient cancelled with a day's notice and paid in advance. Your clinic refunds in full. The total is above what your owner lets you refund alone."
Success criteria: Participant notices the limit before trying, and sends the request to the owner.
Observation notes: Four of six saw the limit on the first screen. P2 and P5 scrolled past it and only noticed after pressing refund.
Post-test questions
Scale, SUS style: 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
- I would use this system frequently: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
- The system was unnecessarily complex: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
- I felt confident using the system: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
Wrap-up
"Any final thoughts? Thanks again, here's how we'll use what we learned."
Observation table
| Participant |
Task |
Success |
Notes |
| P1 |
1 |
Yes |
1 min 40 s, no hesitation |
| P1 |
2 |
Yes |
Spotted the limit, sent to owner |
| P2 |
1 |
Yes |
2 min 10 s, looked for a receipt option |
| P2 |
2 |
Partial |
Missed the limit notice until after pressing refund |
| P3 |
1 |
Yes |
Slowed at confirmation, double checked the card |
| P3 |
2 |
Yes |
Sent to owner, asked how long approval takes |
| P4 |
1 |
Yes |
Asked if the patient gets an email |
| P4 |
2 |
Yes |
Sent to owner first try |
| P5 |
1 |
Yes |
1 min 50 s, looked for a receipt option |
| P5 |
2 |
Partial |
Same as P2; scrolled past the notice |
| P6 |
1 |
Yes |
1 min 30 s, no hesitation |
| P6 |
2 |
Yes |
Read the notice aloud, sent to owner |
Results summary
Task success
83%
10 of 12 tasks
Median time on task
1.9 min
Top findings:
- The limit notice is easy to scroll past. Move it next to the amount field.
- The named confirmation ("Refund £35.00 to Visa 4421") builds confidence; keep it.
- Patients ask about receipts at the desk; three of six participants looked for an email option.
The template
Show the blank template
Usability test script
Author: [your name] · Date: [date]
Intro script
"Thanks for making time. We're testing the design, not you. There's no wrong way to use it, and if something's confusing that's useful information, not a mistake on your part. Please think out loud as you go. Okay to record this session?"
Warm-up questions
- What do you currently use for [task]?
- Walk me through the last time you did [related task].
Tasks
One scenario per task, phrased as a goal, not a set of steps. Don't tell them where to click.
Task 1
Scenario: "Imagine you need to [goal]."
Success criteria: What completion looks like, defined before the session so you're not rationalizing afterward.
Observation notes:
Task 2
Scenario:
Success criteria:
Observation notes:
Post-test questions
SUS-style: 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
- I would use this system frequently: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
- The system was unnecessarily complex: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
- I felt confident using the system: ⬜1 ⬜2 ⬜3 ⬜4 ⬜5
Wrap-up
"Any final thoughts? Thanks again, here's how we'll use what we learned."
Observation table
Participant codes only (P1, P2). Names and contact details stay in the recruiting sheet.
| Participant |
Task |
Success |
Notes |
|
|
|
|
Results summary
Fill in after the last session. Numbers frame the findings; the notes above explain them.
Top findings:
- [finding, and how many participants hit it]
- [finding]
- [finding]
Questions
- How many tasks fit in a session?
- Three to five for a 45 minute session, with time left for warm up and wrap up
- How many participants do I need?
- Five per distinct user group finds most of the big problems
- How should I name participants?
- Use codes like P1 and P2 and keep the recruiting sheet with names somewhere separate
Fill it with your agent
Connect Claude to reph over MCP, then paste this. The draft arrives as suggestions you accept or reject section by section. How to connect Claude.
Find my reph doc "Usability test script" with search_docs, then read it with read_doc. Draft warm-up questions and task scenarios from the research plan and prototype flows I link, each task a goal with a success criterion and no click instructions. Fill observations with participant codes only, never names or contact details. File it with suggest_edit, one replace_section op per section (heading line kept) so each can be accepted alone. Ask each open question (tasks that may lead the participant) with add_comment quoting that section's heading line, then call request_review with a one-line summary.
Related templates
Start with this template →Sign in