Claude Skills by product-on-purpose

<1-2 sentences, include trigger keywords, max 1024 chars>

A hypothesis is a testable prediction about how a change will affect user behavior or business outcomes. It transforms assumptions into explicit statements that can be validated or invalidated through experimentation. Well-formed hypotheses prevent teams from building features based on untested beliefs and create shared understanding of what success looks like.

A Jobs to be Done (JTBD) canvas captures the complete picture of why customers "hire" products to make progress in their lives. Based on Clayton Christensen's framework, JTBD goes beyond features and demographics to understand the underlying motivations—functional, emotional, and social—that drive customer behavior.

An Opportunity Solution Tree (OST) is a visual framework for product discovery that connects business outcomes to customer opportunities and potential solutions. Developed by Teresa Torres, it prevents the common trap of jumping straight to solutions by ensuring every feature idea traces back to a customer need and measurable outcome.

A problem statement is a concise document that frames the problem you're solving, articulates the impact on users and the business, and defines clear success criteria. It serves as the foundation for all subsequent product work by ensuring alignment on *what* problem to solve before jumping to *how* to solve it.

An edge cases document systematically catalogs the unusual, boundary, and error scenarios for a feature. While happy-path flows are typically well-specified, edge cases often get discovered in production — causing bugs, poor user experience, and support burden. Documenting edge cases upfront ensures engineering handles them intentionally and QA knows what to test.

A launch checklist is a comprehensive verification document that ensures all functions are ready before releasing a feature or product. It coordinates across engineering, QA, design, marketing, support, legal, and operations to prevent launch-day surprises. Good launch checklists surface blockers early and create shared accountability for launch readiness.

A Product Requirements Document is the primary specification artifact that communicates what to build and why. It bridges the gap between problem understanding and engineering implementation by providing clear requirements, success criteria, and scope boundaries. A good PRD enables engineering to build the right thing while maintaining flexibility on implementation details.

Release notes communicate product changes to users in a way that highlights value and builds excitement. Unlike changelogs (which document what changed technically), release notes translate changes into user benefits. Good release notes help users discover new capabilities, understand improvements, and trust that issues are being addressed.

User stories are concise descriptions of functionality from the user's perspective. They capture who needs something, what they need, and why — without prescribing how to build it. Good user stories enable teams to break large features into estimable, deliverable increments while maintaining focus on user value.

An Architecture Decision Record documents a significant technical decision along with its context and consequences. ADRs capture the "why" behind architectural choices so future team members understand the reasoning — especially important when they question why something was done a particular way. This skill follows Michael Nygard's lightweight ADR format.

A design rationale document captures the "why" behind design decisions—the context, constraints, alternatives considered, and reasoning that led to a particular solution. While designs themselves show what was built, rationale documents preserve institutional knowledge about why it was built that way.

A solution brief is a concise, one-page document that communicates the proposed solution to a problem. It serves as the bridge between problem understanding and detailed specification, providing enough context for stakeholders to align on the approach without getting lost in implementation details. The one-page constraint forces clarity and prioritization.

A spike summary documents the results of a time-boxed exploration — a focused investigation to reduce uncertainty before committing to implementation. Spikes answer specific questions like "Can we integrate with this API?" or "Is this technology viable for our use case?" The summary captures findings so the team can make informed decisions without the spike participants needing to repeat explanations.

A competitive analysis provides structured insight into the competitive landscape, helping product teams understand where they stand relative to alternatives and identify opportunities for differentiation. Rather than exhaustively cataloging every competitor, an effective analysis focuses on actionable insights that inform product strategy.

An interview synthesis transforms raw user research data into structured insights that drive product decisions. Rather than simply listing what participants said, a good synthesis identifies patterns across conversations, connects observations to underlying user needs, and translates findings into actionable recommendations.

A stakeholder summary documents the people and groups who have interest in or influence over a project, capturing their needs, concerns, and relationships. Effective stakeholder management often determines project success more than technical execution, making this document essential for navigating organizational complexity.

A lessons log entry captures significant learning from projects, incidents, or experiences in a format that's useful to future teams who weren't there. Unlike retrospectives (which focus on team improvement), lessons logs focus on organizational knowledge that transcends individual teams—patterns, anti-patterns, and hard-won wisdom.

A pivot decision document captures the analysis and rationale behind a strategic direction change—or the decision to stay the course. Based on the Lean Startup concept of "pivot or persevere," this artifact ensures major strategic decisions are made with evidence, communicated clearly, and preserved for organizational learning.

Refinement notes capture the outcomes of backlog refinement (grooming) sessions—what was discussed, what was estimated, and what decisions were made. They serve as a quick reference for team members who missed the session and a historical record of how stories evolved from idea to ready-for-sprint.

A retrospective is a structured reflection that helps teams learn from their experiences and continuously improve. By regularly examining what went well, what didn't, and what to change, teams build a culture of learning and adaptation. The value isn't just in the discussion—it's in the documented actions and follow-through.

A dashboard requirements document specifies what questions a dashboard should answer, what metrics it displays, and how data should be visualized. Clear requirements help data teams build dashboards that actually inform decisions rather than just displaying numbers.

An experiment design document defines all parameters needed to run a rigorous A/B test or controlled experiment. It ensures the team aligns on what you're testing, how you'll measure success, and how long to run the test before drawing conclusions. Good experiment design prevents common pitfalls: underpowered tests, unclear success criteria, and decisions based on noise rather than signal.

An experiment results document captures what happened when you tested a hypothesis, including statistical outcomes, segment analysis, learnings, and clear recommendations. Good results documentation turns individual experiments into organizational knowledge that improves future decision-making.

An instrumentation spec defines what analytics events to track, when to fire them, and what properties to include. It serves as a contract between product and engineering, ensuring consistent data collection that enables accurate measurement. Good instrumentation specs prevent the "we can't answer that question because we didn't track it" problem.

Status: Shipped Milestone: v2.5.0 Issue: #108

Validates internet access, compares the locally installed pm-skills version against the latest public release, and updates local files with conflict-aware overwrite-or-skip options. Produces an update report listing changed files, skipped files, and new capabilities. Use when you want to bring a local pm-skills installation up to date.

Storevine B2B ecommerce platform - using the skill builder to create a campaign-analytics skill.

Run applicable prioritization frameworks (RICE, ICE, MoSCoW, Weighted Scoring, Kano) against a list of features or initiatives. Produces a comparison table showing where rankings agree and diverge across frameworks, and an executive summary with recommendation. Framework applicability is filtered by data availability; Kano requires customer research. Refuses to fabricate scores; produces an estimation scaffold when input data is missing.

Generates structured Given/When/Then acceptance criteria for a user story or feature slice. Use when translating product requirements into testable scenarios that cover the happy path, edge cases, error states, and non-functional expectations for engineering handoff and QA.

Produce a customer journey map covering stages, touchpoints, emotional curve, pain points, moments of truth, and opportunity annotations. Output is a markdown artifact that may include mermaid timeline / flowchart visualization. Supports both linear journey (start to end) and cyclical journey (recurring engagement loops). Refuses to fabricate emotional or behavioral data without research input.

Estimate market opportunity (TAM, SAM, SOM) using multiple sizing frameworks (top-down, bottom-up, comparable company, analogous market). Triangulates across frameworks, highlights where they converge and diverge as signal, and produces a calibrated range with source-graded confidence labels. Refuses unbounded fabrications; always offers a labeled lower-confidence path when data is thin. Used for investment cases, go/no-go decisions, and stakeholder pitches.

Produces a one-page lean canvas across nine interlocking blocks (problem, customer, UVP, solution, channels, revenue, cost, metrics, unfair advantage) with optional inline HTML and SVG visual rendering. Use when framing a new product thesis, stress-testing an existing strategy, comparing strategic options side-by-side, or aligning a team on business-model assumptions. Works as a strategic hub that cross-links to deeper PM skills without duplicating them.

Produces an attendee-facing agenda that sets what will be discussed, who owns each topic, and how time will be spent. Supports ten meeting type variants (standup, planning, review, decision-making, brainstorm, 1-on-1, stakeholder-review, project-kickoff, working-session, exec-briefing). Emits a shareable summary suitable for Slack or email plus a full agenda with time-boxed topics, type tags, owners, attendee prep, and logistics.

Produces a private strategic preparation document for the user before a meeting that matters. Captures stakes, stakeholder positions and reads, ranked desired outcomes, key messages, anticipated questions with prepared responses, risks and tensions, specific asks, and success signals. Distinct from meeting-agenda because this artifact is not shared with attendees; it is the user's personal tactical prep for meetings where positioning matters.

Produces a topic-segmented post-meeting summary for attendees with decisions highlighted and actions captured inline per topic (plus a consolidated action view at the end). Auto-populates topic skeleton from a sibling meeting-agenda when available and reconciles planned vs. actual topics. Accepts transcripts from Zoom, Meet, Otter, Fireflies, Krisp MCP, or manual notes; runs on variable-quality input without blocking.

Cross-meeting archaeology skill. Consumes multiple meeting recaps (or raw notes) over a period and surfaces patterns invisible in any single meeting. Shows how decisions evolved, who has been saying what, where threads are stalling, and where contradictions have emerged. Produces a plain-text timeline, themes with confidence markers, stakeholder position tracking, consolidated decision list, contradiction flags, open items, narrative summary, and prioritized follow-ups.

Drafts, reviews, rewrites, and coaches outcome-based OKR sets across team, department, product, or company scopes. Supports five entry modes (Guided default, One-Shot via --oneshot, Sustained Coach, Audit Only, Rewrite). Diagnoses empowered-team context and adjusts framing; refuses to fabricate baselines or targets; refuses to use OKR scores for compensation; reframes feature-delivery KRs into outcome KRs. Use when planning quarterly OKRs, translating strategy into team outcomes, reviewing dr...

Generates an evidence-calibrated product or marketing persona using the canonical v2.5 output contract. Use when shaping artifact perspective, stress-testing decisions, or framing product and GTM strategy.

Produces async communication to stakeholders, primarily non-attendees and secondarily some attendees who want a reference. Translates meeting outcomes into what-it-means language for readers, with channel variants (slack, teams, email, notion, exec-memo) and audience variants (engineering, design, leadership, customer-facing, mixed). Surfaces a primary CTA up front, flags technical-to-business translations for user verification, and detects thread continuation from prior updates.

Scores completed OKR sets at cycle close with KR-level scoring per the canonical OKR type enum (committed | aspirational | learning | operational_health | compliance_or_safety), committed-vs-aspirational interpretation, evidence quality assessment, learning synthesis, and next-cycle recommendations. Refuses to retroactively change targets or shrink committed scope, average away guardrail KRs, treat 0.7 as success for committed or compliance_or_safety KRs, equate effort with impact, or use sco...

Analyze survey results into actionable PM insights. Produces persona segmentation, hypothesis validation status, thematic clustering of open-text responses, statistical confidence labels, prioritized recommendations, and what-NOT-to-conclude warnings. Refuses to overstate statistical significance from weak samples or biased instruments.

Pre-sprint brief that locks challenge, sprint questions, team and role assignments, customer recruiting plan, prototype medium, interview format, logistics, and success criteria before Monday of a Design Sprint. Use after the readiness verdict is Go and before Monday begins. Produces a two-page artifact the team and Decider sign off on as the contract for the next five days.

Day 3 (Wednesday) move of a Design Sprint that runs the art museum layout, heat map, speed critique, straw poll, Decider supervote, rumble-vs-all-in-one decision, and the storyboard that drives Thursday's prototype build. The most decision-heavy day of the sprint. Use Wednesday morning and afternoon after Tuesday's sketches are collected and attribution-stripped. Produces the canonical 5-15 step storyboard that becomes the build spec.

Day 1 (Monday) move of a Design Sprint that produces the bundled Monday artifact containing long-term goal, sprint questions (3-7 testable risks), customer or system map (5-15 step flow), expert interview notes, HMW (How Might We) cluster board, and the Decider's chosen target moment. Use Day 1 morning and afternoon after the sprint brief is locked. Sets the design target for Tuesday's sketches and Wednesday's storyboard.

Day 4 (Thursday) move of a Design Sprint that produces the planning artifact for the day. Output covers the prototype role plan (Maker, Stitcher, Writer, Asset Collector, Interviewer), prototype brief (what to build, fidelity bar, time allocation per role), canonical Five-Act Interview script (Welcome, Context, Intro, Tasks, Debrief), trial-run checklist, and Friday participant confirmation tracker. The actual prototype build is craft work outside the skill's AI invocation surface. Use Thursd...

Pre-sprint diagnostic that determines whether a team should run a Design Sprint now, postpone it, or do prerequisite work first. Produces a Go / Conditional Go / Wait verdict with diagnosis, recommended preconditions, attendee list, customer recruiting plan, and pre-sprint activities. Use when a team is considering starting a Design Sprint and wants a fast yes/no diagnosis before committing five days of team time and customer recruiting cost.

Day 2 (Tuesday) move of a Design Sprint that structures lightning demos and the four-step independent solution sketch protocol (Notes, Ideas, Crazy 8s, Solution Sketch). Each team member produces one solution sketch individually; the skill orchestrates the day but does not author the sketches themselves. Use Tuesday morning after Monday's target moment is locked. Output is the lightning demo board, sketch assignments, and the cohort of independent sketches that become Wednesday's heat-map mat...

Day 5 (Friday) sprint-closing move of a Design Sprint that produces the bundled Friday artifact covering per-customer interview observations, best quotes, scorecard grid (sprint questions by customers), observed patterns, hot takes from each team member, and the Decider summary (build, iterate, pivot, or stop, plus highest-confidence learning, most important revision, and next artifact). Use Friday after Thursday's prototype passes trial run and during/after the 5 customer interviews. The spr...

Day 2 morning move of a Foundation Sprint. Forces generation of 3 to 7 candidate approaches as one-page summaries before the team converges on a top bet. Use after Day 1 is signed and before Magic Lenses on Day 2 afternoon. Enforces a minimum of 3 approaches to prevent first-idea anchoring. Each approach summary names what it is, why it serves the differentiators, and includes a simple visual.