prd-writing
Skill1 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write lightweight agile PRDs and technical RFCs that align stakeholders before implementation. Triggers: PRD, product requirements, RFC, request for comments, technical design doc, design document, tech spec, write requirements, what are we building, spec this out. Produces the WHAT and WHY — feature-planning handles HOW.
16 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- okou-ai/okou-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- jokob-sk/NetAlertXtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- netalertx/NetAlertXtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Maudeunfledged834/startup-founder-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- Timi-Fish/chinese-pm-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use feedback-synthesis, onboarding-flow and 1 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.
Dragoon0xSkillfeedback-synthesis
Turn raw customer feedback from multiple sources into clear product insights and priorities. Covers feedback collection, pattern recognition, and separating signal from noise. Use when feedback feels overwhelming, contradictory, or when the team can't agree on what users actually want.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Dragoon0xSkillonboarding-flow
Design first-run experiences that create the aha moment fast. Reduces time-to-value by sequencing actions, progressive disclosure, and contextual guidance. Use when building signup flows, product tours, or empty states.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +1 more from Dragoon0x
Other versions16 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 16
- jokob-sk/NetAlertX★ 7.4ksame name
- netalertx/NetAlertX★ 7.4ksame name
- shawnpang/startup-founder-skills★ 331same name
- GenerativeAgents/claude-code-book-chapter8★ 114same name
- itseffi/agentic-os★ 114same name
- okou-ai/okou-skills★ 81same name
- vm0-ai/vm0-skills★ 81same name
- Maudeunfledged834/startup-founder-skills★ 8same name
- Dragoon0x/product-skills★ 4same name
- limengzhe27-boop/claude-product-doc-skills★ 2same name
6 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 repository68 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- accessibility-designSkill
- ai-evaluationSkill
- api-designSkill
- architecture-designSkill
- architecture-documentationSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- browser-verificationSkill
- bug-investigatingSkill
- build-vs-buySkill
- cicd-pipelineSkill
- code-archaeologySkill
- code-reviewingSkill
- code-slop-cleanupSkill
- compliance-privacySkill
- configuration-strategySkill
- containerizationSkill
- data-modelingSkill
- data-pipeline-designSkill
- data-qualitySkill
- dependency-impact-analysisSkill
- dependency-managementSkill
- deployment-checklistSkill
- deployment-repoSkill
- dx-auditSkill
- effort-estimationSkill
- exploratory-data-analysisSkill
- feature-planningSkill
- finops-cost-optimizationSkill
- frontend-architectureSkill
- gitops-deliverySkill
- git-workflowSkill
- incident-responseSkill
- infrastructure-as-codeSkill
- llm-app-engineeringSkill
- metrics-and-okrsSkill
- ml-experiment-trackingSkill
- ml-model-deploymentSkill
- ml-pipeline-designSkill
- mobile-architectureSkill
- mobile-releaseSkill
- notebook-to-productionSkill
- observability-designSkill
- performance-optimizationSkill
- plan-executionSkill
- project-documentationSkill
- project-proposalSkill
- project-reviewSkill
- refactoringSkill
- release-managementSkill
- research-methodologySkill
- resilience-engineeringSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- rollback-strategySkill
- security-auditSkill
- skill-routerSkill
- statistical-analysisSkill
- strategic-reviewSkill
- subagent-orchestrationSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
Write lightweight requirements and design documents that align stakeholders without drowning in waterfall-style documentation.
- Distinctive: line 15
When: Before starting a significant feature or epic (more than a sprint of work)
- Distinctive: line 20
When: Before implementing non-trivial technical work (new service, data migration, architecture change)
- Distinctive: line 28
Every PRD begins with a crystal-clear problem statement:
- Distinctive: line 35
If you can't articulate the problem, you're not ready to write requirements.
- Distinctive: line 64
Document constraints: performance requirements, accessibility requirements, platform support, backwards compatibility, regulatory …
- Distinctive: line 68
If mockups, wireframes, or user flows exist, link them.
- Distinctive: line 72
Use the template at templates/prd.md.
- Distinctive: line 101
Use the template at templates/rfc.md.
- Distinctive: line 106
KISS: If it takes more than an afternoon to write, the scope is too large — split it.
- Distinctive: line 107
Working software over comprehensive documentation: Write just enough to align.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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 & RFC Writing
Write lightweight requirements and design documents that align stakeholders without drowning in waterfall-style documentation. In agile, these documents are living artifacts — concise enough to write quickly, clear enough to prevent misalignment.
Two Document Types
Agile PRD (Product Requirements Document)
Audience: Product, design, engineering, stakeholders Purpose: Define WHAT to build and WHY, from the user's perspective When: Before starting a significant feature or epic (more than a sprint of work)
Technical RFC (Request for Comments)
Audience: Engineering team, tech leads, architects Purpose: Propose HOW to build something technically, gather feedback before committing When: Before implementing non-trivial technical work (new service, data migration, architecture change)
Many features need both: a PRD from the product side and an RFC from the engineering side. Some only need one.
Workflow: Agile PRD
Step 1: Start with the Problem
Every PRD begins with a crystal-clear problem statement:
- What user pain or business need does this address?
- Who specifically has this problem? (Define the persona)
- How big is this problem? (Frequency, severity, number of users affected)
- What do users do today to work around it?
If you can't articulate the problem, you're not ready to write requirements.
Step 2: Define Goals and Non-Goals
Goals: What this project will achieve (tied to metrics when possible) Non-goals: What this project explicitly will NOT do (prevents scope creep)
Non-goals are just as important as goals. They're the guardrails that keep the project focused.
Step 3: Write User Stories
Express requirements as user stories:
As a [user persona],
I want to [action/capability],
so that [benefit/outcome].Group stories by priority using MoSCoW:
- Must have: Project fails without these
- Should have: Important but not launch-blocking
- Could have: Nice to have if time allows
- Won't have (this time): Explicitly deferred
Step 4: Define Acceptance Criteria and Constraints
For each must-have story, define acceptance criteria (use feature-planning's Given/When/Then format).
Document constraints: performance requirements, accessibility requirements, platform support, backwards compatibility, regulatory compliance.
Step 5: Include Design Context
If mockups, wireframes, or user flows exist, link them. If not, describe the intended user experience in enough detail that a designer can start.
Step 6: Produce the PRD
Use the template at templates/prd.md. Keep it under 3 pages. Link to detailed resources rather than embedding everything.
Workflow: Technical RFC
Step 1: State the Problem and Context
Same discipline as the PRD — start with why, not what. Include:
- What triggered this RFC (feature requirement, scaling issue, tech debt)
- Current state of the system
- Constraints (timeline, backward compatibility, team expertise)
Step 2: Propose the Solution
Describe the technical approach clearly. Include:
- High-level architecture or design
- Key components and their interactions
- Data model changes (link to
data-modelingif needed) - API changes (link to
api-designif needed)
Step 3: Present Alternatives
List 2-3 alternatives considered with tradeoffs. This proves you've thought beyond the first idea.
Step 4: Identify Open Questions
List questions that need answering during or after the review process. This invites targeted feedback.
Step 5: Produce the RFC
Use the template at templates/rfc.md. Circulate for review with a clear deadline.
Principles Applied
- Agile over waterfall: These documents are living drafts, not contracts. Update as understanding evolves.
- KISS: If it takes more than an afternoon to write, the scope is too large — split it.
- Working software over comprehensive documentation: Write just enough to align. The code is the real spec.
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.

