--- name: prd-development description: Guide product managers through structured PRD (Product Requirements Document) creation by orchestrating problem framing, user research synthesis, solution definition, and success criteria into a cohes type: workflow --- ## Purpose Guide product managers through structured PRD (Product Requirements Document) creation by orchestrating problem framing, user research synthesis, solution definition, and success criteria into a cohesive document. Use this to move from scattered notes and Slack threads to a clear, comprehensive PRD that aligns stakeholders, provides engineering context, and serves as a source of truth—avoiding ambiguity, scope creep, and the "build what's in my head" trap. This is not a waterfall spec—it's a living document that captures strategic context, customer problems, proposed solutions, and success criteria, evolving as you learn through delivery. ## Key Concepts ### What is a PRD? A PRD (Product Requirements Document) is a structured document that answers: 1. **What problem are we solving?** (Problem statement) 2. **For whom?** (Target users/personas) 3. **Why now?** (Strategic context, business case) 4. **What are we building?** (Solution overview) 5. **How will we measure success?** (Metrics, success criteria) 6. **What are the requirements?** (User stories, acceptance criteria, constraints) 7. **What are we NOT building?** (Out of scope) ### PRD Structure (Standard Template) ```markdown # [Feature/Product Name] PRD ## 1. Executive Summary - One-paragraph overview (problem + solution + impact) ## 2. Problem Statement - Who has this problem? - What is the problem? - Why is it painful? - Evidence (customer quotes, data, research) ## 3. Target Users & Personas - Primary persona(s) - Secondary persona(s) - Jobs-to-be-done ## 4. Strategic Context - Business goals (OKRs) - Market opportunity (TAM/SAM/SOM) - Competitive landscape - Why now? ## 5. Solution Overview - High-level description - User flows or wireframes - Key features ## 6. Success Metrics - Primary metric (what we're optimizing for) - Secondary metrics - Targets (current → goal) ## 7. User Stories & Requirements - Epic hypothesis - User stories with acceptance criteria - Edge cases, constraints ## 8. Out of Scope - What we're NOT building (and why) ## 9. Dependencies & Risks - Technical dependencies - External dependencies (integrations, partnerships) - Risks and mitigations ## 10. Open Questions - Unresolved decisions - Areas requiring discovery ``` ### Why This Works - **Alignment:** Ensures everyone (PM, design, eng, stakeholders) understands the "why" - **Context preservation:** Captures research and strategic rationale for future reference - **Decision log:** Documents what's in scope, out of scope, and why - **Execution clarity:** Provides engineering with user stories and acceptance criteria ### Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT) - **Not a detailed spec:** PRDs frame the problem and solution; they don't specify UI pixel-by-pixel - **Not waterfall:** PRDs evolve as you learn; they're not frozen contracts - **Not a substitute for collaboration:** PRDs complement conversation, not replace it ### When to Use This - Starting a major feature or product initiative - Aligning cross-functional teams on scope and requirements - Documenting decisions for future reference - Onboarding new team members to a project ### When NOT to Use This - For small bug fixes or trivial features (overkill) - When problem and solution are already clear and aligned (just write user stories) - For continuous discovery experiments (use Lean UX Canvas instead) --- ### Facilitation Source of Truth When running this workflow as a guided conversation, use [`workshop-facilitation`](../workshop-facilitation/SKILL.md) as the interaction protocol. It defines: - session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess) - one-question turns with plain-language prompts - progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5) - interruption handling and pause/resume behavior - numbered recommendations at decision points - quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include `Other (specify)` when useful) This file defines the workflow sequence and domain-specific outputs. If there is a conflict, follow this file's workflow logic. ## Application Use `template.md` for the full fill-in structure. This workflow orchestrates **8 phases** over **2-4 days**, using multiple component and interactive skills. --- ## Phase 1: Executive Summary (30 minutes) **Goal:** Write a one-paragraph overview for skimmers. ### Activities **1. Draft Executive Summary** - **Format:** "We're building [solution] for [persona] to solve [problem], which will result in [impact]." - **Example:** > "We're building a guided onboarding checklist for non-technical small business owners to solve the problem of 60% drop-off in the first 24 hours due to lack of guidance, which will increase activation rate from 40% to 60% and reduce churn by 10%." - **Participants:** PM - **Duration:** 30 minutes - **Output:** One-paragraph summary **Tip:** Write this first (forces clarity), but refine it last (after other sections are complete). --- ## Phase 2: Problem Statement (60 minutes) **Goal:** Frame the customer problem with evidence. ### Activities **1. Write Problem Statement** - **Use:** `skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md` (component) - **Input:** Discovery insights from `skills/discovery-process/SKILL.md` or `skills/problem-framing-canvas/SKILL.md` - **Participants:** PM - **Duration:** 30 minutes - **Output:** Structured problem statement **Example Problem Statement:** ```markdown ## 2. Problem Statement ### Who has this problem? Non-technical small business owners (solopreneurs, 1-10 employees) who sign up for our SaaS product. ### What is the problem? 60% of users abandon onboarding within the first 24 hours because they don't know what to do first. They see an empty dashboard with no guidance, get overwhelmed by options, and leave. ### Why is it painful? - **User impact:** Wastes time (30-60 min trying to figure out product), never reaches "aha moment," churns before experiencing value - **Business impact:** 60% activation rate → high churn, low LTV, poor word-of-mouth ### Evidence - **Interviews:** 8/10 churned users said "I didn't know what to do first" (discovery interviews, Feb 2026) - **Analytics:** 60% of signups complete 0 actions within 24 hours (Mixpanel, Jan 2026) - **Support tickets:** "How do I get started?" is #1 support question (350 tickets/month) - **Customer quote:** "I logged in, saw an empty dashboard, and thought 'now what?' I gave up and went back to my spreadsheet." ``` **2. Add Supporting Context (Optional)** - **Customer journey map:** If problem spans multiple touchpoints - **Use:** `skills/customer-journey-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md` output - **Jobs-to-be-done:** If motivations are key - **Use:** `skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md` output ### Outputs from Phase 2 - **Problem statement:** Who, what, why, evidence - **Supporting artifacts:** Journey map, JTBD (if relevant) --- ## Phase 3: Target Users & Personas (30 minutes) **Goal:** Define who you're building for. ### Activities **1. Document Personas** - **Use:** `skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md` (component) output - **Participants:** PM - **Duration:** 30 minutes - **Format:** Include persona name, role, goals, pain points, behaviors **Example:** ```markdown ## 3. Target Users & Personas ### Primary Persona: Solo Entrepreneur Sam - **Role:** Freelance consultant, solopreneur - **Company size:** 1 person (no IT support) - **Tech savviness:** Low (uses email, spreadsheets, basic SaaS) - **Goals:** Get value from software fast without technical expertise - **Pain points:** Overwhelmed by complex UIs, no time to watch tutorials, needs immediate value - **Current behavior:** Signs up for products, tries for 1 day, churns if not immediately useful ### Secondary Persona: Small Business Owner (5-10 employees) - **Role:** Owner-operator, manages team - **Needs:** Onboard team members quickly - **Differs from primary:** More tolerant of complexity, willing to invest setup time ``` ### Outputs from Phase 3 - **Primary persona:** Detailed profile - **Secondary personas:** (if applicable) --- ## Phase 4: Strategic Context (45 minutes) **Goal:** Explain why this matters to the business and why now. ### Activities **1. Document Business Goals** - **Source:** Company OKRs, strategic memos, roadmap - **Format:** Link feature to business outcomes - **Example:** > "This initiative supports our Q1 OKR: Reduce churn from 15% to 8%. Improving onboarding activation directly impacts retention." **2. Size Market Opportunity (Optional)** - **Use:** `skills/tam-sam-som-calculator/SKILL.md` (interactive) output - **When:** For major initiatives, new products, exec presentations - **Example:** > "TAM: 50M small businesses globally. SAM: 5M using SaaS tools. SOM: 500K solopreneurs in our target segments. Improving onboarding could unlock 30% of SAM (1.5M potential customers)." **3. Document Competitive Landscape (Optional)** - **Source:** Competitor research, G2/Capterra reviews - **Example:** > "Competitors (Competitor A, B) have guided onboarding. Our lack of guidance is cited as a churn reason in exit surveys." **4. Explain "Why Now?"** - **Rationale:** Why prioritize this now vs. later? - **Example:** > "Churn spiked 15% in Q4. Onboarding is the #1 driver (60% churn in first 30 days). Fixing this is critical to hitting retention OKR." ### Outputs from Phase 4 - **Business goals:** OKRs or strategic initiatives - **Market opportunity:** TAM/SAM/SOM (if applicable) - **Competitive context:** How competitors address this - **Why now:** Urgency rationale --- ## Phase 5: Solution Overview (60 minutes) **Goal:** Describe what you're building (high-level, not detailed spec). ### Activities **1. Write Solution Description** - **Format:** High-level overview, 2-3 paragraphs - **Example:** ```markdown ## 5. Solution Overview We're building a **guided onboarding checklist** that walks new users through core workflows step-by-step when they first log in. **How it works:** 1. User signs up and logs in for the first time 2. Modal appears: "Let's get you set up! Complete these 3 steps to get started." 3. Checklist shows: - ☐ Create your first project - ☐ Invite a teammate (optional) - ☐ Complete a sample task 4. As user completes each step, checklist updates with checkmarks 5. After completion, celebration modal: "You're all set! Here's what to do next." **Key features:** - Minimal: Only 3 core steps (not overwhelming) - Dismissible: Users can skip if they prefer to explore - Progress tracking: Visual progress bar (1/3, 2/3, 3/3) - Celebration: Positive reinforcement when complete ``` **2. Add User Flows or Wireframes (Optional)** - **Use:** Design tools (Figma, Sketch), or hand-drawn sketches - **When:** For complex features requiring visual explanation - **Output:** Embedded in PRD or linked **3. Reference Story Map (Optional)** - **Use:** `skills/user-story-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md` output - **When:** For complex features with multiple release slices - **Output:** Link to story map ### Outputs from Phase 5 - **Solution description:** High-level overview - **User flows/wireframes:** (if applicable) - **Story map:** (if applicable) --- ## Phase 6: Success Metrics (30 minutes) **Goal:** Define how you'll measure success. ### Activities **1. Define Primary Metric** - **Question:** What is the ONE metric this feature must move? - **Example:** "Activation rate (% of users completing first action within 24 hours)" - **Target:** "Increase from 40% to 60%" **2. Define Secondary Metrics** - **Question:** What else should we monitor (but not optimize for)? - **Examples:** - Time-to-first-action (reduce from 3 days to 1 day) - Completion rate of onboarding checklist (target: 80%) - Support ticket volume (reduce "How do I get started?" tickets by 50%) **3. Define Guardrail Metrics** - **Question:** What should NOT get worse? - **Example:** "Sign-up conversion rate (don't add friction to signup flow)" **Example:** ```markdown ## 6. Success Metrics ### Primary Metric **Activation rate** (% of users completing first action within 24 hours) - **Current:** 40% - **Target:** 60% - **Timeline:** Measure 30 days after launch ### Secondary Metrics - **Time-to-first-action:** Reduce from 3 days to 1 day - **Onboarding checklist completion rate:** 80% of users complete all 3 steps - **Support tickets:** Reduce "How do I get started?" tickets from 350/month to 175/month ### Guardrail Metrics - **Sign-up conversion rate:** Maintain at 10% (don't add friction to signup) ``` ### Outputs from Phase 6 - **Primary metric:** What you're optimizing for - **Secondary metrics:** Additional success indicators - **Guardrail metrics:** What shouldn't regress --- ## Phase 7: User Stories & Requirements (90-120 minutes) **Goal:** Break solution into user stories with acceptance criteria. ### Activities **1. Write Epic Hypothesis** - **Use:** `skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md` (component) - **Participants:** PM - **Duration:** 30 minutes - **Output:** Epic hypothesis statement **Example:** > "We believe that adding a guided onboarding checklist for non-technical users will increase activation rate from 40% to 60% because users currently drop off due to lack of guidance. We'll measure success by activation rate 30 days post-launch." **2. Break Down Epic into User Stories** - **Use:** `skills/epic-breakdown-advisor/SKILL.md` (interactive - with Richard Lawrence's 9 patterns) - **Participants:** PM, design, engineering - **Duration:** 90 minutes - **Output:** User stories split by patterns (workflow, CRUD, business rules, etc.) **3. Write User Stories** - **Use:** `skills/user-story/SKILL.md` (component) - **Participants:** PM - **Duration:** 30 minutes per story - **Format:** User story + acceptance criteria **Example User Stories:** ```markdown ## 7. User Stories & Requirements ### Epic Hypothesis We believe that adding a guided onboarding checklist for non-technical users will increase activation rate from 40% to 60% because users currently drop off due to lack of guidance. ### User Stories **Story 1: Display onboarding checklist on first login** As a new user, I want to see a guided checklist when I first log in, so I know what to do first. **Acceptance Criteria:** - [ ] When user logs in for the first time, modal appears with checklist - [ ] Checklist shows 3 steps: "Create project," "Invite teammate," "Complete task" - [ ] Modal is dismissible (close button) - [ ] If dismissed, checklist doesn't reappear (user preference saved) **Story 2: Track checklist progress** As a new user, I want to see my progress as I complete checklist steps, so I feel a sense of accomplishment. **Acceptance Criteria:** - [ ] When user completes step 1, checkmark appears next to "Create project" - [ ] Progress bar updates (1/3 → 2/3 → 3/3) - [ ] Checklist persists across sessions (if user logs out and back in) **Story 3: Celebrate checklist completion** As a new user, I want to receive positive feedback when I complete the checklist, so I feel confident using the product. **Acceptance Criteria:** - [ ] When user completes all 3 steps, celebration modal appears - [ ] Message: "You're all set! Here's what to do next: [suggested next actions]" - [ ] Confetti animation (optional, nice-to-have) ``` **4. Document Constraints & Edge Cases** - **Technical constraints:** Platform limitations, browser support, etc. - **Edge cases:** What if user skips step 2? What if they complete steps out of order? ### Outputs from Phase 7 - **Epic hypothesis:** Testable statement - **User stories:** 3-10 stories with acceptance criteria - **Constraints:** Technical limitations, edge cases --- ## Phase 8: Out of Scope & Dependencies (30 minutes) **Goal:** Define what you're NOT building and what you depend on. ### Activities **1. Document Out of Scope** - **Format:** List features/requests explicitly excluded - **Rationale:** Why not building now? **Example:** ```markdown ## 8. Out of Scope **Not included in this release:** - **Advanced onboarding personalization** (e.g., different checklists per persona) — Adds complexity, test simple version first - **Video tutorials embedded in checklist** — Resource-intensive, validate checklist concept first - **Gamification (badges, points)** — Nice-to-have, focus on core workflow guidance **Future consideration:** - Mobile-optimized onboarding (desktop-first for now) ``` **2. Document Dependencies** - **Technical dependencies:** Platform upgrades, API changes required - **External dependencies:** Third-party integrations, partnerships - **Team dependencies:** Design handoff, data pipeline work **Example:** ```markdown ## 9. Dependencies & Risks ### Dependencies - **Design:** Wireframes for checklist UI (ETA: Week 1) - **Engineering:** No technical dependencies (uses existing modals framework) ### Risks & Mitigations - **Risk:** Users dismiss checklist immediately, never see it - **Mitigation:** Track dismissal rate; if >50%, iterate on messaging or timing - **Risk:** Checklist steps are too generic, don't resonate with all personas - **Mitigation:** Start with primary persona (Solo Entrepreneur Sam), personalize later ``` **3. Document Open Questions** - **Unresolved decisions:** Areas requiring discovery or discussion **Example:** ```markdown ## 10. Open Questions - Should checklist be mandatory or optional? (Decision: Optional, dismissible) - Should we A/B test checklist vs. no checklist? (Decision: Yes, show to 50% of new users) - What happens if user completes steps out of order? (Decision: Allow any order, update checklist dynamically) ``` ### Outputs from Phase 8 - **Out of scope:** What we're NOT building - **Dependencies:** What we need before starting - **Risks:** Potential blockers and mitigations - **Open questions:** Unresolved decisions --- ## Complete Workflow: End-to-End Summary ``` Day 1: ├─ Phase 1: Executive Summary (30 min) ├─ Phase 2: Problem Statement (60 min) │ └─ Use: skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md ├─ Phase 3: Target Users & Personas (30 min) │ └─ Use: skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md └─ Phase 4: Strategic Context (45 min) └─ Use: skills/tam-sam-som-calculator/SKILL.md (optional) Day 2: ├─ Phase 5: Solution Overview (60 min) │ └─ Use: skills/user-story-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md (optional) ├─ Phase 6: Success Metrics (30 min) └─ Phase 7: User Stories & Requirements (90-120 min) ├─ Use: skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md ├─ Use: skills/epic-breakdown-advisor/SKILL.md └─ Use: skills/user-story/SKILL.md Day 3: ├─ Phase 8: Out of Scope & Dependencies (30 min) └─ Review & Refine (60 min) └─ Read full PRD, polish, get feedback Day 4 (Optional): └─ Stakeholder Review & Approval └─ Present PRD to stakeholders, incorporate feedback ``` **Total Time Investment:** - **Fast track:** 1.5-2 days (straightforward feature, clear requirements) - **Typical:** 2-3 days (includes discovery synthesis, stakeholder review) - **Complex:** 3-4 days (major initiative, multiple personas, extensive user stories) --- ## Examples See `examples/sample.md` for full PRD examples. Mini example excerpt: ```markdown ## 2. Problem Statement - 60% of trial users drop off in first 24 hours ## 6. Success Metrics - Activation rate: 40% → 60% ``` ## Common Pitfalls ### Pitfall 1: PRD Written in Isolation **Symptom:** PM writes PRD alone, presents finished doc to team **Consequence:** No buy-in, team doesn't understand rationale **Fix:** Collaborate on Phase 7 (user stories) with design + eng; review draft PRD before finalizing --- ### Pitfall 2: No Evidence in Problem Statement **Symptom:** "We believe users have this problem" (no data, no quotes) **Consequence:** Team questions whether problem is real **Fix:** Use discovery insights from `skills/discovery-process/SKILL.md`; include customer quotes, analytics, support tickets --- ### Pitfall 3: Solution Too Prescriptive **Symptom:** PRD specifies exact UI, pixel dimensions, button colors **Consequence:** Removes design collaboration, becomes waterfall spec **Fix:** Keep Phase 5 high-level; let design own UI details --- ### Pitfall 4: No Success Metrics **Symptom:** PRD defines problem + solution but no metrics **Consequence:** Can't validate if feature succeeded **Fix:** Always define primary metric in Phase 6 (what you're optimizing for) --- ### Pitfall 5: Out of Scope Not Documented **Symptom:** No section on what's NOT being built **Consequence:** Scope creep, stakeholders expect features not planned **Fix:** Explicitly document out of scope in Phase 8 --- ## References ### Related Skills (Orchestrated by This Workflow) **Phase 2:** - `skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md` (component) - `skills/problem-framing-canvas/SKILL.md` (interactive, for context) - `skills/customer-journey-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md` (interactive, optional) **Phase 3:** - `skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md` (component) - `skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md` (component, optional) **Phase 4:** - `skills/tam-sam-som-calculator/SKILL.md` (interactive, optional) **Phase 5:** - `skills/user-story-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md` (interactive, optional) **Phase 7:** - `skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md` (component) - `skills/epic-breakdown-advisor/SKILL.md` (interactive) - `skills/user-story/SKILL.md` (component) ### External Frameworks - Martin Eriksson, "How to Write a Good PRD" (2012) — PRD structure - Marty Cagan, *Inspired* (2017) — Product spec principles - Amazon, "Working Backwards" (PR/FAQ format) — Alternative to PRD ### Dean's Work - [If Dean has PRD templates, link here] --- **Skill type:** Workflow **Suggested filename:** `prd-development.md` **Suggested placement:** `/skills/workflows/` **Dependencies:** Orchestrates 8+ component and interactive skills across 8 phases