writing-prds
Write a clear, decision-ready PRD (and optionally a PR/FAQ, AI eval spec, and prompt set) for cross-functional alignment.
What this skill does
# Writing PRDs ## Scope **Covers** - Turning a product idea into a **decision-ready PRD** with unambiguous scope, requirements, and success metrics - Optionally producing a **PR/FAQ** (press release + FAQ) to force customer-centric narrative first - For AI features: adding a **Prompt Set** + **Eval Spec** so “requirements” are testable and continuously checkable **When to use** - “Write a PRD / product spec / requirements doc for this feature.” - “Turn these messy notes into a PRD we can align on.” - “Create a PR/FAQ and then a PRD.” - “This is an AI feature; I need evals + prompts to define behavior.” **When NOT to use** - You’re still choosing *what strategy/market to pursue* (do product vision / strategy first) - You need discovery from scratch (research plan, problem validation) more than requirements - You need a detailed engineering design doc (APIs, schemas, low-level architecture) - You’re prioritizing among many initiatives (do roadmap prioritization first) ## Inputs **Minimum required** - Product + target user/customer segment - Problem statement + why now (what changed, what’s broken, or what opportunity exists) - Goal(s) + non-goal(s) + key constraints (timeline, policy/legal, platform, dependencies) - Success metric(s) + 2–5 guardrails (quality, safety, cost, latency, trust) **If it’s an AI feature (additionally)** - What the model/system should do vs must never do (policy + safety) - Concrete examples of desired and undesired outputs - How correctness will be evaluated (offline tests, human review, online metrics) **Missing-info strategy** - Ask up to 5 questions from [references/INTAKE.md](references/INTAKE.md). - If answers are still missing, proceed with clearly labeled assumptions and provide 2–3 options (scope, metric, rollout). ## Outputs (deliverables) Produce a **PRD Pack** in Markdown (in-chat; or as files if the user requests): 1) **Context snapshot** (what decision we’re making, constraints, stakeholders) 2) **Artifact selection** (PR/FAQ vs PRD vs AI add-ons) 3) **PR/FAQ** (optional) — customer narrative + FAQs 4) **PRD** — goals/non-goals, requirements (R1…Rn), UX flows, metrics, rollout 5) **AI Prompt Set** (if AI) — versioned prompts + examples + guardrails 6) **AI Eval Spec** (if AI) — acceptance tests + judge prompts + pass/fail criteria 7) **Risks / Open questions / Next steps** (always included) Templates: [references/TEMPLATES.md](references/TEMPLATES.md) ## Workflow (8 steps) ### 1) Decide the artifact set (don’t over-document) - **Inputs:** User request + constraints. - **Actions:** Choose: PR/FAQ only, PRD only, PR/FAQ → PRD, or PRD + AI add-ons (Prompt Set + Eval Spec). - **Outputs:** Artifact selection + rationale. - **Checks:** The artifacts match the decision being made and the audience. ### 2) Intake + clarify decision and success - **Inputs:** [references/INTAKE.md](references/INTAKE.md). - **Actions:** Ask up to 5 questions; confirm decision owner, timeline, constraints, and success metrics/guardrails. - **Outputs:** Context snapshot. - **Checks:** You can state “what we’re deciding” and “how we’ll measure success” in 1–2 sentences. ### 3) Write the customer narrative first (PR/FAQ or PRD narrative) - **Inputs:** Context snapshot. - **Actions:** Draft a customer-centric narrative (problem → solution → why now). If using PR/FAQ, draft the press release headline/summary and top FAQs. - **Outputs:** Narrative section (and PR/FAQ if selected). - **Checks:** A stakeholder can restate the customer benefit and urgency without jargon. ### 4) Lock scope boundaries (goals, non-goals, out of scope) - **Inputs:** Narrative + constraints. - **Actions:** Define goals, non-goals, and explicit exclusions; call out dependencies and assumptions. - **Outputs:** Scope section(s) in the PRD. - **Checks:** “What we are NOT doing” is as clear as what we are doing. ### 5) Convert scope into testable requirements (R1…Rn) - **Inputs:** Goals + user journeys. - **Actions:** Write numbered requirements with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and non-functional needs (privacy, latency, reliability). Mark “must/should/could”. - **Outputs:** Requirements table/list. - **Checks:** An engineer or QA can turn requirements into test cases without asking you to interpret intent. ### 6) Define UX flows + instrumentation plan - **Inputs:** Requirements + current product surfaces/events. - **Actions:** Describe key user flows/states; specify success metrics, guardrails, and event/data needs (what to log, where, who owns). - **Outputs:** UX/flows section + metrics & instrumentation section. - **Checks:** Every goal has at least one measurable metric and a realistic data source. ### 7) If AI feature: ship prompts + evals as “living requirements” - **Inputs:** Requirements + examples. - **Actions:** Create a versioned Prompt Set and an Eval Spec (judge prompts + test set + pass thresholds). Include red-team/failure modes. - **Outputs:** Prompt Set + Eval Spec drafts. - **Checks:** The eval suite can fail when behavior regresses and pass when requirements are met. ### 8) Quality gate + finalize for circulation - **Inputs:** Full draft pack. - **Actions:** Run [references/CHECKLISTS.md](references/CHECKLISTS.md) and score with [references/RUBRIC.md](references/RUBRIC.md). Add Risks/Open questions/Next steps. - **Outputs:** Final PRD Pack (shareable as-is). - **Checks:** Decisions, owners, metrics, and open questions are explicit. ## Quality gate (required) - Use [references/CHECKLISTS.md](references/CHECKLISTS.md) and [references/RUBRIC.md](references/RUBRIC.md). - Always include: **Risks**, **Open questions**, **Next steps**. ## Examples **Example 1 (B2B SaaS feature):** “Write a PR/FAQ + PRD for ‘Saved views’ in our analytics dashboard for admins.” Expected: PR/FAQ narrative, a scoped PRD with R1…Rn, metrics/guardrails, and a rollout plan. **Example 2 (AI feature):** “Write a PRD + Prompt Set + Eval Spec for an ‘AI email reply’ assistant with brand tone constraints.” Expected: requirements that include safety/brand constraints, a prompt set with examples, and an eval spec with judge prompts + pass/fail thresholds. **Boundary example:** “Write a PRD for ‘make onboarding better’ (no product context).” Response: ask the minimum intake questions; if context remains missing, produce 2–3 scoped options + assumptions and recommend discovery before committing to requirements.
Related in AI Agents
skill-development
IncludedComprehensive meta-skill for creating, managing, validating, auditing, and distributing Claude Code skills and slash commands (unified in v2.1.3+). Provides skill templates, creation workflows, validation patterns, audit checklists, naming conventions, YAML frontmatter guidance, progressive disclosure examples, and best practices lookup. Use when creating new skills, validating existing skills, auditing skill quality, understanding skill architecture, needing skill templates, learning about YAML frontmatter requirements, progressive disclosure patterns, tool restrictions (allowed-tools), skill composition, skill naming conventions, troubleshooting skill activation issues, creating custom slash commands, configuring command frontmatter, using command arguments ($ARGUMENTS, $1, $2), bash execution in commands, file references in commands, command namespacing, plugin commands, MCP slash commands, Skill tool configuration, or deciding between skills vs slash commands. Delegates to docs-management skill for official documentation.
reprompter
IncludedTransform messy prompts into well-structured, effective prompts — single or multi-agent. Use when: "reprompt", "reprompt this", "clean up this prompt", "structure my prompt", rough text needing XML tags and best practices, "reprompter teams", "repromptception", "run with quality", "smart run", "smart agents", multi-agent tasks, audits, parallel work, anything going to agent teams. Don't use when: simple Q&A, pure chat, immediate execution-only tasks. See "Don't Use When" section for details. Outputs: Structured XML/Markdown prompt, quality score (before/after), optional team brief + per-agent sub-prompts, agent team output files. Success criteria: Single mode quality score ≥ 7/10; Repromptception per-agent prompt quality score 8+/10; all required sections present, actionable and specific.
adaptive-compaction
IncludedAdaptive add-on policy and recovery layer that decides WHEN to compact, prune, snapshot, or fork -- replacing fixed-percent auto-compaction across Claude Code, Codex, and MCP-capable hosts. Trigger on auto-compact timing or damage: "when should I compact", "is it safe to compact now or start a fresh session", "auto-compact fires too early/mid-task", "switching to an unrelated task but the window still has space", "context rot", "answers get worse the longer the session runs", "the agent forgot the plan or my decisions after it summarized", "add a layer on top that manages context without changing the agent", raising autoCompactWindow to give the policy room, or installing/tuning a cross-tool compaction policy or PreCompact hook -- even when "compaction" is never said but the problem is context-window pressure or post-summarization memory loss. Do NOT use to summarize a conversation, build RAG, write a summarization prompt (decides WHEN not HOW), or answer max-context-length trivia.
agent-skill-creator
IncludedCreate cross-platform agent skills from workflow descriptions. Activates when users ask to create an agent, automate a repetitive workflow, create a custom skill, or need advanced agent creation. Triggers on phrases like create agent for, automate workflow, create skill for, every day I have to, daily I need to, turn process into agent, need to automate, create a cross-platform skill, validate this skill, export this skill, migrate this skill. Supports single skills, multi-agent suites, transcript processing, template-based creation, interactive configuration, cross-platform export, and spec validation.
llm-wiki
IncludedUse when building or maintaining a persistent personal knowledge base (second brain) in Obsidian where an LLM incrementally ingests sources, updates entity/concept pages, maintains cross-references, and keeps a synthesis current. Triggers include "second brain", "Obsidian wiki", "personal knowledge management", "ingest this paper/article/book", "build a research wiki", "compound knowledge", "Memex", or whenever the user wants knowledge to accumulate across sessions instead of being re-derived by RAG on every query.
skill-master
IncludedAgent Skills authoring, evaluation, and optimization. Create, edit, validate, benchmark, and improve skills following the agentskills.io specification. Use when designing SKILL.md files, structuring skill folders (references, scripts, assets), ingesting external documentation into skills, running trigger evals, benchmarking skill quality, optimizing descriptions, or performing blind A/B comparisons. Keywords: agentskills.io, SKILL.md, skill authoring, eval, benchmark, trigger optimization.