prd-clarifier
Skill1 starsChanged 59 days agoMITView on GitHub
Refine a PRD through structured questions that uncover ambiguities, missing edge cases, and hidden assumptions. Use when a PRD exists but needs sharpening — after generate-prd, when requirements feel vague, when user says "review my PRD", "clarify requirements", "what am I missing", or wants to improve spec quality before building.
In this repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- design-craft/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- android-emulatorSkill
- audit-branchSkill
- brainstormSkill
- create-devtoolSkill
- create-featureSkill
- create-infrastructureSkill
- execute-tasksSkill
- finish-featureSkill
- frontend-testingSkill
- generate-feature-docSkill
- generate-prdSkill
- git-commitSkill
- ios-simulatorSkill
- modify-featureSkill
- pipeline-helpSkill
- plan-implementationSkill
- prd-to-uxSkill
- prototypeSkill
- react-clean-architectureSkill
- receiving-code-reviewSkill
- refactoring-uiSkill
- setup-daher-skillsSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- test-mobile-appSkill
- writing-skillsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Ask user for session depth
- Distinctive: line 14
Ask questions in small batches, adapting based on answers
- Distinctive: line 55
When there's a clear best answer, mark that option "(Recommended)" and include a one-line rationale — don't make the user guess what you'd …
- Distinctive: line 61
Keep a running list of clarifications to merge into the PRD at the end.
- Distinctive: line 68
Add missing edge cases to the requirements section
- Distinctive: line 70
Add resolved ambiguities where they belong in the document
- Very specific: line 71
Add a ## Clarifications section at the end listing key decisions made during this session
- Very specific: line 75
Use the AskUserQuestion tool to present next step options:
- Very specific: line 80
Do NOT present numbered text options.
- Distinctive: line 88
If context was cleaned mid-pipeline:
- Distinctive: line 90
Read the PRD (it may already contain some clarifications from a partial session)
- Very specific: line 91
Check the ## Clarifications section at the end of the PRD for what's already been resolved
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
PRD Clarifier
Systematically improve a PRD by asking targeted questions that uncover ambiguities, gaps, and hidden assumptions. Each question should make the document more buildable.
How It Works
- Read the PRD
- Ask user for session depth
- Ask questions in small batches, adapting based on answers
- Track Q&A as you go
- Update PRD.md directly with all clarifications — no separate file
Step 1: Setup
Find the PRD file. You will update it directly at the end — no separate clarification file.
Step 2: Ask Depth
Analyze the PRD complexity (features, integrations, edge cases) and recommend a depth. Mark your recommendation with "(Recommended)".
| Depth | Questions | When to use |
| Quick | 5 | Small feature, mostly clear PRD |
| Standard | 10 | Typical feature with some gaps |
| Thorough | 15 | Complex feature, multiple integrations |
| Deep | 25 | Large scope, many unknowns |
Step 3: Ask Questions
Prioritize by impact
- Blockers: requirements that block other work or have safety/security implications
- Contract verification: flag any PRD statement about an API endpoint, request/response shape, or field that is not yet verified against the backend (real code, MSW mocks, or backend docs) — ask how it will be verified or mark it UNVERIFIED in the PRD. Verify against the project's local backend checkout at its latest integration ref (protocol per the project's CLAUDE.md / api-boundary rule) before asking the user to relay.
- Vague language: missing acceptance criteria, undefined terms, "should be fast"
- Integration points: APIs, third-party services, data dependencies
- Edge cases: error handling, boundary conditions, empty states
- Missing non-functionals: performance targets, accessibility, scalability
Adapt after each answer
- Answer revealed a new ambiguity → prioritize it next
- Answer clarified related areas → skip redundant questions
- Answer contradicts an earlier one → address the conflict
- Answer introduced new scope → flag it, don't expand scope silently
Question rules
- Reference specific sections or statements from the PRD
- Batch up to 4 bounded, independent questions per
AskUserQuestioncall (the tool supports 4 max). Fall back to one-at-a-time only when a question depends on the answer to another - When there's a clear best answer, mark that option "(Recommended)" and include a one-line rationale — don't make the user guess what you'd pick
- Provide selectable options when the answer space is bounded
- Acknowledge previous answers when building on them
After each answer
Keep a running list of clarifications to merge into the PRD at the end. No separate tracking file — you will edit PRD.md directly in Step 4.
Step 4: Merge Into PRD
After all questions:
- Update PRD.md directly — merge all clarifications into the relevant sections:
- Add missing edge cases to the requirements section
- Refine vague language with concrete acceptance criteria
- Add resolved ambiguities where they belong in the document
- Add a
## Clarificationssection at the end listing key decisions made during this session - Every resolved clarification must change the requirements themselves — a new/edited row in the Functional Requirements table or a new/edited acceptance criterion. A bullet in
## Clarificationsalone is not enough; downstream skills read the requirements, not the changelog
- Summarize what changed for the user
- List remaining ambiguities that weren't resolved (if any)
- Use the
AskUserQuestiontool to present next step options:
- prd-to-ux — translate requirements into UX specification
- Something else — do something different
Do NOT present numbered text options. Always use the AskUserQuestion tool for skill transitions.
Important: PRD.md is now the single source of truth. Do not create a separate *-clarification.md file. All downstream steps (prd-to-ux, plan-implementation) read only the PRD.
Done when: PRD.md contains the merged clarifications, a ## Clarifications section, and every resolved item changed an actual requirement row or acceptance criterion (verify in the diff).
Resume After Context Cleanup
If context was cleaned mid-pipeline:
- Read the PRD (it may already contain some clarifications from a partial session)
- Check the
## Clarificationssection at the end of the PRD for what's already been resolved - Continue from where you left off — don't repeat questions already answered
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.

