prd-writer
Skill8 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Expert PRD (Product Requirements Document) writer for the AI era. Use when users want to create PRDs, spec documents, product specifications, feature specs, or technical requirements documents. Also use when users ask to review/improve existing PRDs, want PRD templates, need guidance on product documentation, or mention writing product specs. Handles both traditional and AI-specific product features with emphasis on decision-making over documentation.
35 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- alunadev/ald-skillsedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- shawnclybor/clybor-claude-toolingtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Sach1ng/PM-operating-OStheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- WST2002/claude-code-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- awahids/noskilltheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- sankar2code/Claude-Skill_SubAgent-Builder-Collectionstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use experiment-designer, user-research 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.
Dokkabei97Skillexperiment-designer
Designs A/B tests and product experiments with hypothesis structuring, sample size calculation, duration estimation, and result interpretation. Unified framework for both product and marketing experiments.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkilluser-research
Plan, conduct, and synthesize user research. Trigger with "user research plan", "interview guide", "usability test", "survey design", "research questions", or when the user needs help with any aspect of understanding their users through research.
Also in 3 projects that use this
OpenAISkillbrainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions35 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 2
- alunadev/ald-skills★ 492% same
- stefanomartiradonna/claude-skills★ 092% same
Wrote their own version · 33
- aakashg/pm-claude-code-setup★ 152same name
- cigery-useio/useio-skills★ 103same name
- skinnerlee1225/enterprise-prd-toolkit★ 45same name
- nimbalyst/skills★ 28same name
- vibepm666/prd-writer★ 27same name
- aroyburman-codes/pm-skills★ 25same name
- HiWhaleW/skill★ 22same name
- Panix22/prd-writer-skill★ 19same name
- samlaying/pm-skills★ 9same name
- shawnclybor/clybor-claude-tooling★ 6same name
23 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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- blueprint-gateSkill
- blueprint-runnerSkill
- blueprint-writerSkill
- brand-guide-visualizerSkill
- prd-gateSkill
- prd-journeysSkill
- prd-updaterSkill
- stitch-promptSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
29 rules. 0 are common, 27 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 25 edited versions we read keep these.
27
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
After writing, run prd-gate against the draft (DEFINE exit).
- Distinctive: line 41
Key insight: When building fast becomes easy (thanks to AI), knowing what to build becomes even more important.
- Distinctive: line 52
Use AI tools to mock up 3 different approaches in an afternoon
- Distinctive: line 76
Every great PRD must include these elements:
- Distinctive: line 88
Offline Golden Set: Test data for validation
- Distinctive: line 104
Decision Points: When to revisit/adjust
- Distinctive: line 116
Reject cases: When AI should refuse/defer
- Distinctive: line 141
Critical principle: Don't treat PRDs as one-and-done.
- Distinctive: line 181
Update PRD top with results doc link
- Distinctive: line 195
Write the first draft yourself with clear decisions
- Distinctive: line 196
Use LLM as copilot to improve and finesse
- Distinctive: line 212
Every section should answer a decision:
- Distinctive: line 218
Before considering a PRD complete, verify:
- Distinctive: line 255
Fix: Every paragraph should end with a decision or a specific example
- Distinctive: line 275
Fix: Update PRD at each stage, link to results, annex learnings from production
- Distinctive: line 279
When using AI tools in development, ensure:
- Distinctive: line 303
When creating PRDs, use this structure:
- Distinctive: line 324
Use tables for examples and metrics
- Distinctive: line 326
Keep paragraphs to 3 sentences max
- Distinctive: line 327
Use bullet points for lists, not prose
- Distinctive: line 363
When reviewing a PRD, assess these dimensions:
- Distinctive: line 372
Check for edge case coverage
- Very specific: line 373
Verify good/bad/reject cases exist
- Distinctive: line 382
Do graduation criteria exist?
- Distinctive: line 386
Ask: "Can engineering build from this without asking questions?" If no, the PRD needs more specificity.
- Distinctive: line 387
If no, the PRD needs more specificity.
- Distinctive: line 397
PRDs are living documents: - Update through all five stages
- Distinctive: line 398
Decisions over documentation: - Every section should decide something
- Distinctive: line 402
Don't use LLMs for first drafts: - Use them to polish your decisions
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 25 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 Writer - AI Era Product Specifications
Originally written by Rohan Shah.
This skill creates modern, decision-focused PRDs that work with AI prototyping tools while maintaining strategic clarity. Based on proven practices from leading tech companies including OpenAI.
Using inside BuilderOS
BuilderOS ships one PRD template — prd/prd.md (phase-split; scale down for small bets by cutting optional sections). This skill's philosophy and quality checklist apply to it; references/prd-template.md is this skill's own reference shape, kept for standalone use outside BuilderOS.
After writing, run prd-gate against the draft (DEFINE exit). Then the PRD feeds erd-writer → erd/erd-template.md (the engineering spec) before any build.
Core Philosophy
PRDs are about decisions, not documentation.
A great PRD in 2025:
- Makes explicit decisions at every turn
- Contains concrete examples, not vague descriptions
- Lives and evolves with the product
- Works alongside AI prototyping, not against it
- Is short, sharp, and actionable
The fatal flaw of bad PRDs: They say a lot without deciding anything. "Improve engagement" is a hope, not a specification.
Why PRDs Still Matter
Even with AI prototyping tools (Cursor, Replit, v0), PRDs remain critical because prototypes don't specify:
- Strategic context: How does this fit the overall strategy?
- Success criteria: What metrics define success?
- Rollout plan: Who gets this and when?
- Risk management: What could go wrong and how do we handle it?
- Non-goals: What are we explicitly NOT doing?
Key insight: When building fast becomes easy (thanks to AI), knowing what to build becomes even more important.
The Modern Product Development Flow
Old flow (linear): PRD → Design → Build → Test
New flow (cyclical): Idea → Quick Prototype → PRD → Refined Prototype → Ship
How PRDs and Prototypes Work Together
Prototypes as discovery tools:
- Use AI tools to mock up 3 different approaches in an afternoon
- Each prototype teaches something about the problem space
- PRD captures learnings and sets direction
PRDs as prototype constraints:
- PRD provides guardrails for prototyping
- Answers: What edge cases? What metrics? How does this fit strategy?
The feedback loop:
- Iterate between prototypes and PRDs multiple times
- Each prototype informs the PRD
- Each PRD update guides the next prototype
Common Failure Modes Without PRDs
Teams that skip PRDs typically:
- Build something fast that doesn't solve the right problem
- Build the right thing but can't measure if it worked
- Ship something that breaks other parts of the product
The PRD is your insurance policy against these failures.
Essential PRD Components
Every great PRD must include these elements:
1. Opportunity Framing
- Core Problem: One-sentence summary of the issue
- Working Hypothesis: One-sentence proposed answer
- Strategy Fit: Which bet/initiative this unlocks now
2. Boundaries
- Scope: What's included
- Non-Goals: What's explicitly excluded (critical for decision-making)
3. Success Measurement
- Offline Golden Set: Test data for validation
- Human Review: Qualitative checks
- Online Metrics: Specific KPIs with thresholds (not "improve X")
4. Rollout Plan
- Exposure: Percentage of traffic or users (specific numbers)
- Duration: Planned test length
- Segments & Ramp Gates: Sequencing criteria and decision points
5. Risk Management
- Detection: How to spot failures
- Fallback & Kill Switch: Recovery mechanisms
- Owners: Who handles incidents
6. Ownership & Action
- Primary Owner: Accountable person/team
- Decision Points: When to revisit/adjust
AI-Specific PRD Requirements
For AI features, add these critical elements:
Behavior Contract with Examples
The defining characteristic of AI PRDs: tons of concrete examples
Include 15-25 labeled examples showing:
- Good responses: What the AI should do
- Bad responses: Common failure modes
- Reject cases: When AI should refuse/defer
Format for each example:
User Input: [specific query or scenario]
Good Response: [desired AI behavior]
Bad Response: [what to avoid]
Reject: [when to refuse]Principles and Instructions
- Clear guidelines for AI behavior
- Specific risks and how to avoid them
- Guardrails and safety measures
Edge Cases and Red-Team List
- Adversarial inputs
- PII/sensitive data handling
- Performance degradation scenarios
- Code snippets, special characters, multi-language inputs
Reference model: OpenAI's Model Spec is the gold standard - filled with concrete examples, not abstract principles.
The Five-Stage PRD Evolution
Critical principle: Don't treat PRDs as one-and-done. They evolve through the product lifecycle.
Stage 1: Planning (Speclet)
Lightweight exploration document:
- Problem + motivating data (quantitative + 3 user quotes)
- Hypothesis + strategy fit
- Comp set & prior art research
- Open questions & owners
Purpose: Build shared understanding and get alignment to proceed
Stage 2: Kickoff
Decision to build - now add structure:
- Clear in/out of scope
- Napkin mock (be ready to throw away)
- Success metrics + MDE (Minimum Detectable Effect) + guardrails
- Impact sizing model (order-of-magnitude)
Purpose: Set boundaries and success criteria before detailed design
Stage 3: Solution Review
Detailed specification ready for engineering:
- Behavior contract draft + 15-25 examples
- Edge cases + red-team list
- Tracking requirements
- Rollout design v1
Purpose: Engineering can build to this spec
Stage 4: Launch Readiness
Pre-ship checklist completion:
- Offline eval golden set ready
- Human review rubric ready
- Runbook + fallbacks + kill switch wired
- Legal/Security reviewed
Purpose: Safe, measurable launch
Stage 5: Impact Review (Post-Ship)
Learning and iteration:
- Update PRD top with results doc link
- What surprised us? What will we change?
- Annex: add new good/bad/reject examples from real traffic
- Decision: iterate, scale, or retire
Purpose: Close the loop and capture learnings
Writing Process Best Practices
Critical Rule #1: Don't Use LLMs for First Drafts
Why: LLMs create verbose, decision-free documentation that says nothing
Instead:
- Write the first draft yourself with clear decisions
- Use LLM as copilot to improve and finesse
- Think of AI as teammate, not ghostwriter
Critical Rule #2: Be Specific, Not Generic
Bad (vague): "Improve user engagement" Good (specific): "P50 reply time drops ≥10% vs control group"
Bad (generic): "Generate helpful replies" Good (actionable): "For simple questions (<10 words), respond within 2s with contextually relevant suggestions based on last 3 messages"
Bad (hopeful): "Reduce support tickets" Good (measurable): "Decrease returns-related support tickets by 15-20% (from baseline 18% to 14.4-14.8%) measured over 30-day post-implementation window"
Critical Rule #3: Make Decisions, Not Descriptions
Every section should answer a decision:
- Not: "We will test the feature"
- But: "A/B test with 5% user-level randomization for 2 weeks, graduating at p<0.05 with 10%+ metric lift"
PRD Quality Checklist
Before considering a PRD complete, verify:
Strategic Clarity
- Problem statement is one sentence
- Hypothesis is one sentence
- Strategy fit is explicit and current
Measurability
- Success metrics have specific thresholds (not "improve")
- Guardrail metrics are defined
- Graduation criteria are clear
Actionability
- Engineering knows exactly what to build
- Behavior is specified with examples (15-25 for AI features)
- Edge cases are enumerated
Risk Management
- Detection mechanisms are defined
- Fallback strategies exist
- Kill switch is specified with owner
Rollout Precision
- Exposure percentage is specific
- Duration is planned
- Ramp gates have criteria
Decision Quality
- Every "will" has a "how" and "when"
- Non-goals are explicit
- Owners are named
Common PRD Antipatterns
Antipattern 1: Prose Without Decisions
Symptom: Long paragraphs explaining context with no actionable outcomes
Fix: Every paragraph should end with a decision or a specific example
Antipattern 2: Metric Theater
Symptom: "Improve engagement", "Increase satisfaction", "Reduce costs"
Fix: "P50 engagement time increases ≥15%", "NPS increases from 42 to 48+", "Server costs decrease $12K/month"
Antipattern 3: Implementation Fantasy
Symptom: "Start small, then ramp" or "Three-phase approach"
Fix: "Week 1: 5% US users, Week 2: Graduate if p<0.05 and +10% metric, Week 3: Scale to 25%"
Antipattern 4: Vibe-Based Behavior
Symptom: "Generate helpful replies" or "Provide good recommendations"
Fix: 25 labeled examples showing good/bad/reject cases with specific inputs and outputs
Antipattern 5: One-and-Done Documentation
Symptom: PRD written once, never updated, gathering dust
Fix: Update PRD at each stage, link to results, annex learnings from production
AI Prototyping Integration Checklist
When using AI tools in development, ensure:
Before Prototyping
- PRD speclet exists with problem/hypothesis
- Strategic fit is validated
- Success metrics are defined
During Prototyping
- Each prototype tests specific hypothesis from PRD
- Learnings feed back into PRD updates
- Edge cases discovered are documented
After Prototyping
- PRD reflects prototype learnings
- Behavior contract includes examples from prototypes
- Rollout plan accounts for prototype findings
Before Engineering
- PRD is specific enough to build from
- Examples cover major use cases
- Risk mitigation is planned
Output Format Guidelines
When creating PRDs, use this structure:
Document Header
Title: [Feature Name]
Owner: [Name/Team]
Status: [Planning/Kickoff/Solution Review/Launch Ready/Shipped]
Last Updated: [Date]Section Organization
- Executive Summary (2-3 sentences max)
- Opportunity Framing (Problem, Hypothesis, Strategy Fit)
- Success Measurement (Metrics with thresholds)
- Scope & Non-Goals (Explicit boundaries)
- Behavior Specification (Examples for AI features)
- Rollout Plan (Exposure, duration, gates)
- Risk Management (Detection, fallbacks, owners)
- Open Questions (What we don't know yet)
Formatting Best Practices
- Use tables for examples and metrics
- Bold key decisions and thresholds
- Keep paragraphs to 3 sentences max
- Use bullet points for lists, not prose
- Include specific numbers, not ranges without justification
Domain-Specific Guidance
For Traditional Features (Non-AI)
Focus on:
- User flows and interaction patterns
- Technical dependencies and integrations
- Performance requirements with SLAs
- Migration plans if replacing existing functionality
For AI/ML Features
Focus on:
- Behavior contract with 15-25 examples
- Model performance thresholds
- Human review rubrics
- PII and safety considerations
- Fallback to non-AI flows
For Infrastructure/Platform
Focus on:
- SLAs and reliability targets
- Scale requirements with specific traffic projections
- Migration path and backward compatibility
- Monitoring and alerting specifications
For Experiments/A B Tests
Focus on:
- Statistical power calculations
- Contamination prevention strategies
- Minimum detectable effects
- Graduation and rollback criteria
Reviewing Existing PRDs
When reviewing a PRD, assess these dimensions:
Decision Density
- Count decisions per page (aim for 5+)
- Flag vague language ("improve", "enhance", "optimize")
- Identify missing thresholds on metrics
Example Richness (for AI features)
- Count labeled examples (need 15-25)
- Check for edge case coverage
- Verify good/bad/reject cases exist
Strategic Grounding
- Can you trace feature to specific strategy?
- Are non-goals explicit?
- Is opportunity sizing quantified?
Rollout Readiness
- Are exposure percentages specific?
- Do graduation criteria exist?
- Is risk mitigation planned?
Actionability Test
Ask: "Can engineering build from this without asking questions?" If no, the PRD needs more specificity.
Reference Resources
For additional guidance, see:
references/prd-template.md- Complete template with examplesreferences/before-after.md- Real PRD transformations
Key Reminders
- PRDs are living documents - Update through all five stages
- Decisions over documentation - Every section should decide something
- Examples are mandatory - Especially for AI features (15-25 minimum)
- Specificity wins - "≥10%" not "improve"
- Work with prototypes - PRDs and prototypes iterate together
- Don't use LLMs for first drafts - Use them to polish your decisions
- Non-goals matter - What you're NOT doing is as important as what you are
- Rollout is precise - Percentages, durations, criteria - not "start small"
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.

