When you evaluate features using engagement metrics, there are only two possibilities. If the metric is high, users love the feature. If the metric is low, users don't know the feature exists, and more alerts or "unread" badges must be added to help them learn.
They had better metrics than just number of API requests
If the metric is high, users are spending too much time on it. Also, it is responsible for every single frustration that users have with your product.
If the metric is low, the feature can be safely removed (see: Windows Start menu).
That turned out really well...
Whoever is responsible for putting the touch start screen on Windows Server is responsible for 90% of my frustrations...
Numbers are helpful, but sometimes they can be misinterpreted to mask the why.
No-no-no. Stop right there. "Engagement metrics" are the worst kind of metrics. Engagement means next to nothing. It just means that a user interacted with something. Was it good? Was it bad? Was it intentional? Was it by mistake? "Engagement metrics" answer none of that.
And yet... They are the easiest metrics to collect and too many companies use them as if they were meaningful.
https://m.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Re...
Not sure what it says about them that they're mentioning worthless numbers instead of the way more useful data they got back during this survey.