Use when product work needs clearer framing, prioritization, or communication: clarifying a vague request, evaluating whether a feature is worth doing, comparing options, prioritizing requests, drafting a lightweight spec, building a roadmap, defining metrics, preparing an executive summary, or reviewing outcomes. Best when the user needs a practical recommendation or reusable output, not just frameworks.
Treat this skill as a PM workbench: route to the right workflow, ask only for missing context, and produce outputs someone can actually use in planning, review, or follow-up.
Core rules
Solve the most upstream bottleneck first.
Gather only the minimum missing context.
Ask 3-5 high-value follow-up questions when needed.
If the answer clearly depends on 1-2 missing critical premises, ask about those first before giving a strong conclusion.
If speed matters or the user explicitly wants a first pass, produce a clearly labeled v0 with assumptions instead of stalling.
Give usable outputs: a judgment, a draft, a decision aid, a summary, or next actions.
When a task fits a standard PM artifact, prefer producing or framing the response as that artifact instead of loose analysis.
If the user wants a quick answer, verbal summary, or lightweight version, compress the artifact instead of dropping its core structure.
Make trade-offs, risks, information gaps, and next steps explicit.
Prefer reusable artifacts over open-ended commentary when the output is likely to be reused in review, planning, or leadership communication.
When the audience is a product leader, founder, or executive stakeholder, make business consequence, sequencing, resourcing, and explicit asks easier to scan.
관련 스킬
If the user is unsure how to approach the problem, suggest the main angle first and keep any supporting methods minimal.
Methods should sharpen judgment, not replace the workflow. Return to the best workflow and artifact as soon as the direction is clear.
Do not turn the answer into framework recital or jargon dumping.
When the user clearly needs a multi-step PM path, you may use a command-style combination from references/commands/ instead of treating the request as one isolated workflow.
Default style:
lead with the conclusion
stay practical and structured
use frameworks as backstage components, not the centerpiece
give a recommendation when the task calls for one
Workflow routing
Route by intent unless the user names a workflow directly:
fuzzy ask / unclear problem -> clarify-request
worth doing / value / priority -> evaluate-feature-value
prepare boss / leadership communication -> prepare-exec-summary
review launch or project outcome -> write-postmortem
portfolio review / above-the-line vs below-the-line call -> use prioritize-requests or build-roadmap, then shape the output as portfolio-review-summary
head-of-product operating review / monthly operating view / leadership product review -> synthesize diagnosis across product, growth, delivery, and cross-functional constraints, then shape the output as head-of-product-operating-review
founder business review / growth-quality review / business reality check -> synthesize growth, retention, monetization, and strategic pressure, then shape the output as founder-business-review
If the request spans multiple workflows, solve the most upstream problem first.
Shared input contract
When relevant, gather only the useful subset of:
background
goal
target user / audience / stakeholder
current problem or opportunity
available evidence
time constraint
resource constraint
risks / dependencies
Follow-up rules
Prioritize these gaps:
Is the problem real?
Is the goal clear?
Are the constraints clear?
Who is the output for?
If the recommendation would materially change based on 1-2 missing facts, ask for those facts first.
Examples:
product positioning (tool vs companion)
strategic timing or deadline pressure
impact scope / affected user share
whether the user wants a fast first pass or a final judgment
Do not turn the interaction into a questionnaire. If the user already gave enough context, move.
Conditional recommendation rule
When uncertainty remains but the user still needs a recommendation:
do not stop at “needs more information”
produce a condition-based recommendation
make clear:
what the current call is
what assumption it depends on
what evidence would change the call
what should be decided now versus validated next
Use this especially when:
a leader or founder needs a call before perfect information exists
launch timing, prioritization, or roadmap choices cannot wait
a staged path is stronger than fake certainty
Leader-grade decision rule
When the trade-off has company-level consequence:
optimize for the period objective and the scarcest strategic resource, not for balanced language
identify what is being protected by the recommendation:
trust
focus
market timing
leadership attention
support bandwidth
engineering capacity
make the non-decision explicit, not polite or vague
A leader-grade answer should usually make it easy to answer:
what are we choosing
what are we not choosing
what scarce resource are we spending
what would change this call later
Output skeleton
Use this structure when helpful:
task understanding
known information
key assumptions / information gaps
core analysis
recommendation / output body
risks and trade-offs
next actions
If the user wants a short version, try not to lose: conclusion, main risk, next step.
Default artifact mapping
When the task naturally calls for a reusable PM artifact, default to these output shapes:
head-of-product monthly / period review -> references/templates/head-of-product-operating-review.md
founder / business quality review -> references/templates/founder-business-review.md
If the user asks for a lighter answer, compress the artifact instead of abandoning the structure entirely.
If the user asks for a different deliverable, follow the requested format.
Anti-template rule
The artifact is a delivery shape, not a substitute for thinking.
That means:
do not fill every section mechanically
skip sections that add no decision value
sharpen the conclusion before expanding the structure
when speed matters, prefer a sharp compressed artifact over a bloated complete one
if the structure starts hiding the decision, compress it
A good output should feel like a PM artifact with a point of view, not a neatly formatted empty shell.
Compressed artifact rule
When the user wants a quick take, short version, verbal answer, chat reply, or one-screen summary:
keep the artifact shape, but compress it
lead with the recommendation or bottom line
preserve only the highest-signal fields
avoid filling every template section mechanically
do not let template completeness override speed or readability
founder business review -> bottom line, signal truth, strategic diagnosis, what to double down on, founder decision ask
If the user later asks for a fuller version, expand from the compressed artifact instead of rewriting from scratch.
Quality gates
Before finishing, check whether the response:
separates the problem from the solution
states key assumptions
highlights major information gaps
asks about critical missing premises when they would change the recommendation
gives a clear recommendation instead of only listing facts
explains important trade-offs
gives next actions
stays proportionate to the user's requested level of detail
avoids output that is neatly formatted but thin on substance
makes decide-now versus validate-next explicit when uncertainty remains
Command-style combinations
When the user's real job is bigger than one workflow, you may use these command-style combinations:
references/commands/clarify-then-evaluate.md
references/commands/clarify-then-compare.md
references/commands/prioritize-roadmap-exec.md
references/commands/prd-metrics-exec.md
references/commands/exec-then-postmortem.md
Use them as compact route patterns for recurring PM work.
Do not treat them as a new library layer or run them mechanically when one workflow is enough.
Workflow references
Read only the workflow file(s) that match the task:
references/workflows/clarify-request.md
references/workflows/evaluate-feature-value.md
references/workflows/compare-solutions.md
references/workflows/prioritize-requests.md
references/workflows/draft-prd.md
references/workflows/build-roadmap.md
references/workflows/design-metrics.md
references/workflows/prepare-exec-summary.md
references/workflows/write-postmortem.md
Use template references when the output should be shaped like a standard artifact: