Write a PRD for an AI-powered feature, covering the things normal PRDs miss. Use when asked to spec an AI/LLM feature, write a PRD for a feature that uses a model, or plan an AI capability (assistant, summarizer, generator, classifier). Produces an AI feature PRD — problem & UX of uncertainty, model approach, eval criteria, guardrails, fallback behaviour, the data flywheel, and cost/latency budget.
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill ai-feature-prd --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Ai Feature Prd?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/mohitagw15856-ai-feature-prd-d4a01ad3)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: ai-feature-prd
description: "Write a PRD for an AI-powered feature, covering the things normal PRDs miss. Use when asked to spec an AI/LLM feature, write a PRD for a feature that uses a model, or plan an AI capability (assistant, summarizer, generator, classifier). Produces an AI feature PRD — problem & UX of uncertainty, model approach, eval criteria, guardrails, fallback behaviour, the data flywheel, and cost/latency budget."
---
# AI Feature PRD Skill
AI features break the normal PRD because the system is probabilistic: it will be wrong sometimes, and
the product must be designed around that, not in denial of it. This skill extends a standard PRD with
the AI-specific sections that decide whether the feature is trustworthy — the UX of uncertainty, the
eval bar, guardrails, and what happens when the model is wrong.
## Required Inputs
Ask for these only if they aren't already provided:
- **The user problem** and why an AI/probabilistic approach fits it (vs. deterministic rules).
- **What "good" looks like** to the user, and the cost of a wrong answer (low-stakes vs. high-stakes).
- **Inputs available** — context/data the model can use; privacy constraints.
- **Trust level needed** — can the user verify the output, or must it be near-perfect?
## Reads from / Writes to the Brain
If a [`professional-brain`](../professional-brain/SKILL.md) exists, read `context.md` (product, users, voice)
and `knowledge/strategy.md` first; write the feature to `entities/` and any scoping decision to `decisions/`,
each provenance-tagged.
## Output Format
### AI Feature PRD: [feature]
**1. Problem & why AI** — the user problem, and why a model (not rules) is the right tool. If rules would do, say so.
**2. Experience** — the core flow, and crucially the **UX of uncertainty**: how confidence is shown, how the user verifies/edits, and how errors are made cheap to recover from. AI features live or die here.
**3. Model approach** — prompt / fine-tune / RAG / agent (link [`rag-design-doc`](../rag-design-doc/SKILL.md) or [`agent-spec`](../agent-spec/SKILL.md)), the model tier, and why.
**4. Quality bar & evaluation** — the metrics and the explicit ship threshold; reference an [`ai-eval-plan`](../ai-eval-plan/SKILL.md). State the acceptable error rate given the stakes.
**5. Guardrails & safety** — what the feature must never do, input/output filtering, and handling of harmful/PII/out-of-scope inputs.
**6. Fallback behaviour** — what happens when the model is unsure, wrong, slow, or down: graceful degradation, "I'm not sure" states, human handoff. **No silent confident errors.**
**7. Data flywheel** — how usage (and the 👍/👎 / edits) feed back into evaluation and improvement, with the privacy boundary.
**8. Cost & latency** — the per-request budget and p95 target; reference an [`llm-cost-latency-budget`](../llm-cost-latency-budget/SKILL.md).
**9. Rollout** — staged exposure (internal → %→ GA), the guardrail metrics watched, and the rollback trigger.
## Quality Checks
- [ ] The PRD designs for the model being wrong — there's an explicit fallback, not just the happy path
- [ ] The UX shows uncertainty and lets the user verify/correct cheaply
- [ ] There's an explicit quality bar tied to the stakes (a medical answer and a tweet draft are not the same bar)
- [ ] Guardrails name what the feature must never do
- [ ] A data flywheel is defined with its privacy boundary
- [ ] Cost and p95 latency budgets are stated, not left to "we'll see"
## Anti-Patterns
- [ ] Do not design only the happy path — a probabilistic feature without a fallback is a feature that fails loudly in production
- [ ] Do not hide uncertainty behind a confident UI — overclaimed confidence is how AI features lose user trust permanently
- [ ] Do not use AI where deterministic rules are better, cheaper, and more reliable — "AI" is not the goal
- [ ] Do not set one quality bar for all stakes — calibrate the acceptable error rate to the cost of being wrong
- [ ] Do not ship without a rollback trigger and guardrail metrics — a probabilistic system needs a kill switch
## Based On
Standard PRD practice (see [`prd-template`](../prd-template/SKILL.md)) extended for probabilistic systems — uncertainty UX, eval gates, guardrails, and graceful fallback.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!