prd
Skill4 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Draft a rigorous PRD grounded in the strategy: hypothesis, user stories with ACs, scope, success metrics, Cagan four risks, milestones. Writes 02-prd.md. Requires strategy score ≥ 2.5.
125 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Adelie-Squad/solosquadtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- shaqmughal/seekstonetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lhbsaa/apex-unifiedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Jasenpan1987/multi-codetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- joeldevz/skynex-pitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- insight68/Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use context-optimize, usecase and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
ibahgatSkillcontext-optimize
Improve context efficiency and cache stability for long or complex sessions.
Also in 3 projects that use this
gabriellstSkillusecase
Create an application use case. Use when implementing business operations like CreateOrder, ProcessPayment, CancelBooking. Use this skill for any command/mutation that orchestrates domain logic, whether simple CRUD or complex multi-step transactions with sagas. Dispatch hub — routes to typescript/go variants by file extension.
Also in 3 projects that use this
jidechaoSkillmodern-go
Modernize Go code by applying version-appropriate idioms and APIs (gofix-style transformations). Scans go.mod for the Go version, then transforms Go source files to use modern patterns—from Go 1.0 through 1.26+. Use when the user says "现代化","现代Go语言", "地道的", "idiomatic", "modernize", "modern-go", "update Go code", "gofix", or wants to upgrade Go idioms.
Also in 3 projects that use this
ulises-jeremiasSkilltrd
WHAT — Draft and review a Technical Requirements Document (TRD) using the template, typically
Also in 3 projects that use this
jidechaoSkillloop-it
Automated issue loop with checkpoint/resume: fetch open GitHub issues → dependency-aware topological sort → implement each issue end-to-end → review with /review-it → document with /note-it → ship with /ship-it → repeat. Persists state to .loop-state.json for crash recovery. Triggers on: loop-it, loop issues, auto implement, 批量实现, 循环实现, 实现所有issue, 恢复循环, resume loop.
Also in 3 projects that use this
snarktankSkillralph
Convert PRDs to prd.json format for the Ralph autonomous agent system. Use when you have an existing PRD and need to convert it to Ralph's JSON format. Triggers on: convert this prd, turn this into ralph format, create prd.json from this, ralph json.
Also in 16 projects that use this
- +2 more from jidechao
Other versions125 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 125
- github/awesome-copilot★ 41ksame name
- snarktank/ralph★ 22ksame name
- SethGammon/Citadel★ 927same name
- smallnest/autoresearch★ 571same name
- snarktank/compound-product★ 542same name
- CatCatUncle/openworkbuddy★ 398same name
- smallnest/goal-workflow★ 283same name
- OffchainLabs/arbitrum-docs★ 252same name
- julianromli/ai-skills★ 215same name
- golbin/agent-skills★ 214same name
115 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository18 other files it gives its agents.
- bhaskar-reviewSkill
- cagan-reviewSkill
- challengeSkill
- critiqueSkill
- design-briefSkill
- julie-reviewSkill
- lenny-reviewSkill
- north-starSkill
- onboardSkill
- opportunitySkill
- pstack-helpSkill
- pstack-learnSkill
- pstack-statusSkill
- pstack-upgradeSkill
- ravi-reviewSkill
- shreyas-reviewSkill
- strategySkill
- visionSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
20 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 8 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 102 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
8
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 18
If 01-strategy.md does not exist: tell the user and stop.
- Very specific: line 19
If 01-strategy.md exists but its rubric_score is below 2.5: tell the user: *"The strategy scores {score}/5 — below the 2.5 floor for PRD.
- Very specific: line 20
If rubric_score is missing (not yet scored): run a quick score pass on the strategy before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 22
If the strategy passes, continue.
- Very specific: line 28
Read pstack-workspace/{slug}/01-strategy.md in full — this is the bet you are speccing.
- Very specific: line 29
If any opportunity-*.md files exist, read them — they carry the discovery evidence and riskiest-assumption tests for the bet.
- Distinctive: line 41
Ask these five questions, one at a time:
- Distinctive: line 48
If the user can't state it: *"Try filling in the blanks: We believe ___ will ___ because ___."* Help them iterate.
- Distinctive: line 54
If the answer is a vanity metric (downloads, signups, DAU without context): ask *"That measures activity.
- Distinctive: line 60
Before drafting, read silently:
- Distinctive: line 70
Hypothesis: must include user, behavior, mechanism (because), measurable outcome, baseline, and target.
- Distinctive: line 73
Success metrics: no output metrics (features shipped, story points).
- Distinctive: line 74
Cagan four risks: every risk type must appear.
- Very specific: line 98
Update state to PRD_DONE. Add artifact entry with file, type (prd), version, rubric_score, and date.
- Very specific: line 104
Write ~/.config/pstack/last-session.md per knowledge/schemas/last-session.schema.md.
- Distinctive: line 118
Ask once: *"One thing you'd change about this PRD?
- Distinctive: line 132
Never start if strategy score is below 2.5 — enforce the quality gate
- Very specific: line 134
If the PRD needs to break the strategy's won't-do list, stop and send the user back to /strategy — don't silently override the bet
- Distinctive: line 137
No vanity metrics — push back in the interview.
- Distinctive: line 138
Every Cagan risk must appear — if the user hasn't thought about one, surface it in the risks table with "unknown — discovery needed"
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 102 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/prd
You are the pstack PRD generator. You translate a vision into a structured product requirements document — specific, testable, and free of vanity metrics.
Step 1 — Dependency quality gate
Read pstack-workspace/{slug}/.pstack-meta.json.
- If
01-strategy.mddoes not exist: tell the user and stop. "Run/strategyfirst —/prdrequires a strategy. The PRD specs a bet the strategy has already chosen." - If
01-strategy.mdexists but itsrubric_scoreis below 2.5: tell the user: "The strategy scores {score}/5 — below the 2.5 floor for PRD. Sharpen it with/strategyor run/critiquebefore proceeding." Stop. - If
rubric_scoreis missing (not yet scored): run a quick score pass on the strategy before proceeding.
If the strategy passes, continue.
Step 2 — Read context and frameworks
- Read
pstack-workspace/{slug}/01-strategy.mdin full — this is the bet you are speccing. Read00-vision.mdfor grounding. - If any
opportunity-*.mdfiles exist, read them — they carry the discovery evidence and riskiest-assumption tests for the bet. Use them to seed the hypothesis and the four-risks section instead of re-deriving from scratch. - Read
knowledge/INDEX.md. - Load from INDEX.md:
knowledge/frameworks/cagan-discovery.md— four risks framework
- Read
knowledge/rubrics/prd.yaml.
Inherit, don't re-derive: the PRD's success metrics must descend from the strategy's success definition (North Star + inputs), and the PRD's scope must serve the strategy's bet. Do not invent a new North Star or contradict the strategy's won't-do list — if the PRD needs to, that's a signal to revisit /strategy, not to override it here.
Step 3 — Interview (AskUserQuestion)
Ask these five questions, one at a time:
- "Which slice of the vision are we turning into a PRD? Describe the scope in one sentence — what's in v1, what's not."
- "Who exactly is the target segment? More specific than the vision — which users will we optimize for first?"
- "State your hypothesis: 'We believe [user] will [behavior] because [mechanism], and we'll know we're right when [measurable outcome] moves from [baseline] to [target] within [timeframe].'"
- If the user can't state it: "Try filling in the blanks: We believe ___ will ___ because ___." Help them iterate.
- Push back if the outcome is vague or if there's no baseline.
- "What are the top 3 user stories? Format: 'As a [user], I want to [action] so that [outcome].'"
- "What is the single most important success metric — and what's your baseline today?"
- If the answer is a vanity metric (downloads, signups, DAU without context): ask "That measures activity. What behavior change in the user does success require?"
Step 4 — Read calibration set
Before drafting, read silently:
knowledge/calibration/prd-score-2.md— understand failure modesknowledge/calibration/prd-score-5.md— internalize excellence
Step 5 — DRAFT (internal, invisible to user)
Using skills/prd/template.md as structure, draft 02-prd.md. Apply:
- Hypothesis: must include user, behavior, mechanism (because), measurable outcome, baseline, and target. No hypothesis without all six components.
- Acceptance criteria: Given/When/Then format. The "Then" must be measurable, not a design note.
- Scope: explicit in/out. Every out-of-scope item must have a rationale.
- Success metrics: no output metrics (features shipped, story points). Distinguish leading from lagging. Baselines required.
- Cagan four risks: every risk type must appear. "N/A" is only acceptable for feasibility if a spike has already been run.
Step 6 — SELF-CRITIQUE (internal, invisible to user)
Score the draft against each dimension in knowledge/rubrics/prd.yaml.
Compute weighted average.
If < 3.5: revise the lowest-scoring dimension(s) once. Re-score.
Step 7 — Present the artifact
Present the final 02-prd.md in full. Ask: "Does this capture the product requirements? Anything to adjust before I save?"
Apply corrections. Save to pstack-workspace/{slug}/02-prd.md.
Step 8 — Update .pstack-meta.json
Update state to PRD_DONE. Add artifact entry with file, type (prd), version, rubric_score, and date.
Step 9 — Write last-session.md
Write ~/.config/pstack/last-session.md per knowledge/schemas/last-session.schema.md.
State is PRD_DONE. Suggest /design-brief as primary next; /cagan-review as alternative.
Step 10 — Append quality-log.yaml
Append one entry to ~/.config/pstack/quality-log.yaml per knowledge/schemas/quality-log.schema.yaml.
Step 11 — Capture feedback
Ask once: "One thing you'd change about this PRD? Press Enter to skip."
Append to feedback/prd-log.yaml per knowledge/schemas/feedback-log.schema.yaml.
Step 12 — Suggest next
"Your PRD is saved. Next:
/design-briefto translate this into design direction, or/cagan-reviewto stress-test the four risks before design starts."
Rules
- Never start if strategy score is below 2.5 — enforce the quality gate
- Success metrics inherit from the strategy's success definition; do not invent a competing North Star
- If the PRD needs to break the strategy's won't-do list, stop and send the user back to
/strategy— don't silently override the bet - Hypothesis must have all six components — if the user can't provide them, help construct it step by step
- ACs must be testable — "the button is blue" is not an AC; rewrite it internally
- No vanity metrics — push back in the interview; revise internally if they slip through
- Every Cagan risk must appear — if the user hasn't thought about one, surface it in the risks table with "unknown — discovery needed"
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

