problem-statement
Skill12 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Write a user-centered problem statement with who is blocked, what they are trying to do, why it matters, and how it feels. Use when framing discovery, prioritization, or a PRD.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 65
When you have feature requests but unclear underlying problems
- Distinctive: line 69
When you haven't done any user research yet (don't guess—interview first)
- Very specific: line 77
Use template.md for the full fill-in structure.
- Distinctive: line 80
Before drafting, ensure you have:
- Distinctive: line 86
If missing context: Run discovery interviews, contextual inquiries, or user shadowing.
- Distinctive: line 123
"Makes me feel" authenticity: Do these emotions come from research or assumptions?
- Distinctive: line 139
Relevance: Do these constraints directly impact the problem?
- Distinctive: line 159
One sentence: If it requires multiple sentences, the problem isn't crisp yet
- Distinctive: line 168
Test with users: Read it aloud to people who experience the problem.
- Distinctive: line 170
Iterate based on feedback: If anyone says "I don't think that's the real problem," dig deeper.
- Distinctive: line 224
Fix: Ask "Why is the UI confusing?" Keep asking "why" until you hit the root cause (e.g., "Because users have no mental model for how the …
- Distinctive: line 233
Fix: Use actual quotes from user interviews.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 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
Purpose
Articulate a problem from the user's perspective using an empathy-driven framework that captures who they are, what they're trying to do, what's blocking them, why, and how it makes them feel. Use this to align stakeholders on the problem before jumping to solutions, and to frame product work around user outcomes rather than feature requests.
This is not a requirements doc—it's a human-centered problem narrative that ensures you're solving a problem worth solving.
Input
Works best with: Who the user is and what they're struggling to do. Also useful: What's blocking them, why it matters, how it feels, and supporting evidence.
Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.
Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The skill asks for the user and their goal first — a problem statement without a specific 'who' is a solution looking for cover.
Example invocation: Problem statement: clinic schedulers double-book exam rooms because the calendar doesn't show equipment availability.
Key Concepts
The Problem Framing Framework
Based on Jobs-to-be-Done and empathy mapping, the framework structures problems as:
Problem Framing Narrative:
- I am: [Describe the persona experiencing the problem]
- Trying to: [Desired outcomes the persona cares about]
- But: [Barriers preventing the outcomes]
- Because: [Root cause of the problem]
- Which makes me feel: [Emotional impact]
Context & Constraints:
- [Geographic, technological, time-based, demographic factors]
Final Problem Statement:
- [Single, concise, empathetic summary]
Why This Structure Works
- Persona-centric: Forces you to see the problem through the user's eyes
- Outcome-focused: "Trying to" emphasizes desired results, not tasks
- Root cause analysis: "Because" pushes past symptoms to underlying issues
- Emotional validation: "Makes me feel" humanizes the problem and builds empathy
- Contextual: Constraints acknowledge real-world limitations
Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)
- Not a solution in disguise: "The problem is we lack AI-powered analytics" = sneaking in a solution
- Not a business problem: "Our revenue is down" isn't a user problem (it's a symptom)
- Not a feature request: "Users need a dashboard" isn't a problem (what are they trying to do?)
- Not generic: "Users want better UX" is too vague to be actionable
When to Use This
- Kicking off discovery or problem validation work
- Aligning stakeholders before solutioning
- Socializing a problem with engineering, design, or exec teams
- When you have feature requests but unclear underlying problems
- Pitching why a problem is worth solving
When NOT to Use This
- When you haven't done any user research yet (don't guess—interview first)
- For internal operational problems (this is for user-facing problems)
- As a substitute for a PRD (this frames the problem; PRD defines the solution)
Application
Use template.md for the full fill-in structure.
Step 1: Gather User Context
Before drafting, ensure you have:
- User interviews or research: Direct quotes, observed behaviors, pain points
- Jobs-to-be-Done insights: What users are "hiring" your product to do (reference
skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md) - Persona clarity: Who specifically experiences this problem (reference
skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md) - Constraints data: Geographic, tech, time, demographic limitations
If missing context: Run discovery interviews, contextual inquiries, or user shadowing. Don't fabricate problems.
Step 2: Draft the Problem Framing Narrative
Fill in the template from the persona's point of view:
## Problem Framing Narrative
**I am:** [Describe the key persona, highlighting 3-4 key characteristics]
- [Key pain point or characteristic 1]
- [Key pain point or characteristic 2]
- [Key pain point or characteristic 3]
**Trying to:**
- [Single sentence listing the desired outcomes the persona cares most about]
**But:**
- [Describe the barriers preventing the persona from achieving outcomes]
- [Job-to-be-done or outcome obstruction 1]
- [Job-to-be-done or outcome obstruction 2]
- [Job-to-be-done or outcome obstruction 3]
**Because:**
- [Describe the root cause empathetically]
**Which makes me feel:**
- [Describe the emotions from the persona's perspective]Quality checks:
- "I am" specificity: Can you picture this person? Or is it generic ("busy professionals")?
- "Trying to" clarity: Is this an outcome (measurable) or a task (activity)?
- "But" depth: Are these real barriers or just inconveniences?
- "Because" honesty: Is this the root cause or just a symptom?
- "Makes me feel" authenticity: Do these emotions come from research or assumptions?
Step 3: Document Context & Constraints
## Context & Constraints
- [Enumerate geographic, technological, time-based, or demographic factors]
- [e.g., "Must work offline in rural areas with limited connectivity"]
- [e.g., "Used by non-technical users unfamiliar with complex software"]
- [e.g., "Time-sensitive: decisions must be made within 24 hours"]Quality checks:
- Relevance: Do these constraints directly impact the problem?
- Specificity: Are they concrete enough to inform design decisions?
Step 4: Craft the Final Problem Statement
Synthesize the narrative into one powerful sentence:
## Final Problem Statement
[Single, concise statement that provides a powerful and empathetic summary]Formula: [Persona] needs a way to [desired outcome] because [root cause], which currently [emotional/practical impact].
Example: "Enterprise IT admins need a way to provision user accounts in under 5 minutes because current processes take 2+ hours with manual approvals, which causes project delays and frustrated end-users."
Quality checks:
- One sentence: If it requires multiple sentences, the problem isn't crisp yet
- Measurable: Can you tell if you've solved it?
- Empathetic: Does it resonate emotionally?
- Shareable: Could you say this in a meeting and have stakeholders nod?
Step 5: Validate and Socialize
- Test with users: Read it aloud to people who experience the problem. Do they say "Yes, exactly!"?
- Share with stakeholders: Product, engineering, design, exec. Does it align everyone?
- Iterate based on feedback: If anyone says "I don't think that's the real problem," dig deeper.
Examples
See examples/sample.md for full examples (good and bad problem statements).
Mini example excerpt:
**I am:** A software developer on a distributed team
**Trying to:** Communicate in real-time with my team without losing context
**But:** Email is too slow and IM is ephemeral
**Because:** No tool combines real-time chat with searchable history
**Which makes me feel:** Frustrated and disconnectedCommon Pitfalls
Pitfall 1: Solution Smuggling
Symptom: "The problem is we don't have [specific feature]"
Consequence: You've predetermined the solution without validating the problem.
Fix: Reframe around the user's desired outcome, not the feature. Ask "What are they trying to achieve?"
Pitfall 2: Business Problem Disguised as User Problem
Symptom: "Users want to increase our revenue" or "The problem is our churn rate"
Consequence: These are company problems, not user problems. Users don't care about your metrics.
Fix: Dig into why users churn or what would make them spend more. Frame it from their perspective.
Pitfall 3: Generic Personas
Symptom: "I am a busy professional trying to be more productive"
Consequence: Too broad to be actionable. Every product claims to help "busy professionals."
Fix: Get specific. "I am a sales rep managing 50+ leads manually in spreadsheets, trying to prioritize follow-ups without missing high-value opportunities."
Pitfall 4: Symptom Instead of Root Cause
Symptom: "Because the UI is confusing"
Consequence: You're describing a symptom, not the underlying issue.
Fix: Ask "Why is the UI confusing?" Keep asking "why" until you hit the root cause (e.g., "Because users have no mental model for how the system works").
Pitfall 5: Fabricated Emotions
Symptom: "Which makes me feel empowered and delighted"
Consequence: These sound like marketing copy, not real user emotions.
Fix: Use actual quotes from user interviews. Real emotions: "frustrated," "overwhelmed," "anxious," "stuck."
References
Related Skills
skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md— Informs the "Trying to" and "But" sectionsskills/proto-persona/SKILL.md— Defines the "I am" personaskills/positioning-statement/SKILL.md— Problem statement informs positioningskills/user-story/SKILL.md— Problem statement guides story prioritization
External Frameworks
- Clayton Christensen, Jobs to Be Done — Origin of outcome-focused problem framing
- Osterwalder & Pigneur, Value Proposition Canvas — Customer pains/gains/jobs
- Dave Gray, Empathy Mapping — Emotional framing techniques
Dean's Work
- [Link to relevant Dean Peters' Substack articles if applicable]
Provenance
- Adapted from
prompts/framing-the-problem-statement.mdin thehttps://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-promptsrepo.
Skill type: Component
Suggested filename: problem-statement.md
Suggested placement: /skills/components/
Dependencies: References skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md, skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md
Other versions10 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 5
- deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills★ 7.7k94% same
- The-Utopia-Studio/skills★ 699% same
- agrivisionai/claude-skills★ 199% same
- NinjaSln-labs/agent-skills★ 181% same
- vijaysuperpositionist/skills★ 099% same
Wrote their own version · 5
- SanketSapkal/founder-skills★ 10same name
- petestewart/claude-skills★ 2same name
- fullstackinnoAI/skills★ 1same name
- nandanosql/all_in_one_pm_skills★ 1same name
- drv3nkman/business-problem-toolkit★ 0same name
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 repository58 other files it gives its agents.
- acquisition-channel-advisorSkill
- agent-orchestration-advisorSkill
- ai-shaped-readiness-advisorSkill
- altitude-horizon-frameworkSkill
- business-health-diagnosticSkill
- company-intelSkill
- company-researchSkill
- context-engineering-advisorSkill
- customer-journey-mapping-workshopSkill
- customer-journey-mapSkill
- derisk-measurement-advisorSkill
- director-readiness-advisorSkill
- discovery-interview-prepSkill
- discovery-processSkill
- eol-messageSkill
- epic-breakdown-advisorSkill
- epic-hypothesisSkill
- executive-onboarding-playbookSkill
- experiment-designerSkill
- feature-investment-advisorSkill
- finance-based-pricing-advisorSkill
- finance-metrics-quickrefSkill
- growth-plg-advisorSkill
- jobs-to-be-doneSkill
- lean-ux-canvasSkill
- opportunity-solution-treeSkill
- organic-growth-advisorSkill
- pestel-analysisSkill
- pm-skill-creatorSkill
- pol-probe-advisorSkill
- pol-probeSkill
- positioning-statementSkill
- positioning-workshopSkill
- prd-developmentSkill
- press-releaseSkill
- prioritization-advisorSkill
- problem-framing-canvasSkill
- product-sense-interview-answerSkill
- product-strategy-sessionSkill
- proto-personaSkill
- recommendation-canvasSkill
- roadmap-planningSkill
- saas-economics-efficiency-metricsSkill
- saas-revenue-growth-metricsSkill
- skill-authoring-workflowSkill
- stakeholder-engagement-advisorSkill
- stakeholder-identificationSkill
- stakeholder-mappingSkill
- storyboardSkill
- strategy-canvasSkill
- tam-sam-som-calculatorSkill
- tpm-artifactsSkill
- user-story-mappingSkill
- user-story-mapping-workshopSkill
- user-storySkill
- user-story-splittingSkill
- vp-cpo-readiness-advisorSkill
- workshop-facilitationSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

