agentleFS
aroyburman-codesaroyburman-codes/pm-skills/skills/pm-case-study/SKILL.md

pm-case-study

Skill25 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub

Generate end-to-end PM case studies from real AI product launches, pivots, and decisions. Analyzes what happened, why, what the PM likely decided, trade-offs made, and lessons learned.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Write as a business school case study — structured, analytical, and with clear takeaways.

    line 94

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

PM Case Study Skill

Generate a detailed PM case study from a real AI product launch, pivot, or strategic decision — reconstructing the PM thinking behind it.

When to Use

  • User asks "Write a case study on [AI product launch/decision]"
  • User wants to understand PM decisions behind a real product
  • User says /pm-case-study followed by a topic
  • Great for: ChatGPT launch, Claude's Constitutional AI, Gemini's multimodal strategy, GitHub Copilot pricing, Perplexity's search bet, Midjourney's Discord-first strategy, etc.

Framework: PM Case Study (8 Sections)

Section 1: Executive Summary

  • What happened: One paragraph summary of the product decision/launch
  • When: Timeline of key events
  • Who: Key people and teams involved
  • Outcome: How it played out (success, failure, mixed)

Section 2: Context & Background

  • Company situation: Where was the company at this point? Stage, funding, competitive position.
  • Market context: What was happening in the broader market?
  • Technical context: What capabilities existed? What was newly possible?
  • User context: What were users doing before this product? What pain existed?

Section 3: The Decision

  • What was decided: Specific product/strategy decision
  • Alternatives considered: What other paths were likely on the table?
  • Key trade-offs: What did they give up by choosing this path?
  • Stakeholder dynamics: Who likely championed this? Who likely opposed it?

Section 4: Execution Analysis

  • Go-to-market strategy: How was it launched? Distribution channel?
  • Phasing: Was it a big bang launch or phased rollout?
  • Pricing: How was it priced? Why that model?
  • Technical execution: What was the technical approach? Shortcuts taken?

Section 5: What Went Right

  • Identify 3-5 specific decisions that contributed to success
  • For each: What was the decision, why it mattered, what would have happened otherwise
  • Be specific — reference actual features, timelines, or metrics where available

Section 6: What Went Wrong (or Could Have Been Better)

  • Identify 2-3 mistakes, misses, or areas for improvement
  • For each: What happened, what the impact was, what could have been done differently
  • Be fair — hindsight bias is easy, focus on what was knowable at the time

Section 7: Metrics & Outcomes

  • Growth metrics: Users, revenue, market share (use real numbers where available)
  • Product metrics: Engagement, retention, satisfaction
  • Strategic outcomes: Market position, competitive response, ecosystem effects
  • Unexpected outcomes: Things that happened that nobody predicted

Section 8: Key Takeaways

Extract 3-5 lessons for product managers:

  • Lesson: Clear statement of the principle
  • Application: How to apply this in product sense/strategy decisions
  • Example question: A product question where this lesson is directly relevant

Case Study Categories

Product Launches

  • ChatGPT's launch (Nov 2022) — fastest growing consumer app ever
  • Claude's positioning as the "safe" alternative
  • Perplexity's answer engine vs. Google Search
  • Midjourney's Discord-native strategy
  • Cursor's bet on AI-native IDE

Strategic Pivots

  • An AI lab's shift from nonprofit to capped-profit
  • A safety lab's pivot from pure research to product company
  • A big tech company's emergency response to ChatGPT
  • An open-source LLM strategy from a major tech company

Feature Decisions

  • ChatGPT Plugins → GPTs → the pivot to actions/agents
  • GitHub Copilot's pricing model ($10/month individual)
  • Claude's Artifacts feature
  • Gemini's multimodal-first approach
  • NotebookLM's audio overview feature

Pricing & Business Model

  • LLM API pricing evolution (the race to the bottom)
  • ChatGPT Plus ($20/month) → Team → Enterprise tiers
  • The free tier strategy across AI companies
  • Usage-based vs. seat-based pricing in AI

Output Format

Write as a business school case study — structured, analytical, and with clear takeaways. Use real data where available, clearly mark estimates or speculation. Aim for ~2500 words.

Research-First Workflow (CRITICAL)

This skill requires real data:

  1. Research extensively — Do 10-15 web searches for: launch details, user growth data, pricing history, company blog posts, founder interviews, analyst reports, and competitor responses.
  2. Cite everything — Include [linked source](url) inline for all factual claims.
  3. Date awareness — Note what was known at the time of the decision vs. what we know now.
  4. Display the complete case study.

What Good Looks Like

  • Demonstrates deep knowledge of the AI product landscape
  • Shows you can analyze real product decisions with nuance
  • Provides concrete examples and data points for product discussions
  • Builds pattern recognition across multiple product launches
  • Reveals your product judgment when you evaluate decisions

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.