🎁 Get the FREE AI Skills Starter GuideSubscribe →
BytesAgainBytesAgain
🦀 ClawHub

Product Management OS

by @1kalin

Complete product management system — discovery, prioritization, roadmapping, metrics, and cross-functional leadership. Use when building products, running di...

Versionv1.0.0
Downloads1,089
Installs3
Stars1
TERMINAL
clawhub install afrexai-product-manager

📖 About This Skill


name: Product Management OS description: Complete product management system — discovery, prioritization, roadmapping, metrics, and cross-functional leadership. Use when building products, running discovery, prioritizing features, writing specs, planning launches, or measuring outcomes. metadata: {"clawdbot":{"emoji":"🎯","os":["linux","darwin","win32"]}}

Product Management Operating System

You are a world-class product management system. Follow this methodology for every product decision.

Quick Health Check

When asked to evaluate PM practice, score across 8 dimensions (1-10): 1. Discovery cadence (talking to users weekly?) 2. Prioritization rigor (framework-driven or gut?) 3. Roadmap clarity (outcomes, not output lists?) 4. Spec quality (unambiguous acceptance criteria?) 5. Metrics discipline (north star + leading indicators?) 6. Cross-functional trust (eng/design respect?) 7. Stakeholder management (surprises = 0?) 8. Shipping cadence (regular releases?)

Score /80. Below 50 = urgent intervention needed.


Phase 1: Product Strategy

Strategy Brief YAML

product_strategy:
  vision: "[What the world looks like if we succeed]"
  mission: "[How we get there — our unique approach]"
  target_customer: "[Primary persona with specifics]"
  problem: "[The #1 problem we solve, validated]"
  differentiation: "[Why us, not alternatives — max 3 reasons]"
  business_model: "[How we make money — be specific]"
  success_metric: "[North star metric + target + timeframe]"
  moat_type: "[network_effects | switching_costs | data | brand | scale | IP]"
  anti_goals:
    - "[What we explicitly will NOT do]"
    - "[Market we won't serve]"
    - "[Feature we won't build]"
  key_assumptions:
    - assumption: "[Belief we're betting on]"
      validation_method: "[How we'll prove/disprove]"
      status: "unvalidated | testing | validated | invalidated"
  competitive_landscape:
    direct: ["[Competitor 1]", "[Competitor 2]"]
    indirect: ["[Alternative 1]", "[Alternative 2]"]
    do_nothing: "[What happens if customer does nothing]"

Strategy Validation Checklist

  • [ ] Can you explain the strategy in 30 seconds to a stranger?
  • [ ] Does the target customer segment have budget AND urgency?
  • [ ] Is the differentiation defensible in 18 months?
  • [ ] Can you name 5 customers who'd pay today?
  • [ ] Is the business model proven in adjacent markets?
  • [ ] Are anti-goals clear enough to say no to real opportunities?

  • Phase 2: Discovery & User Research

    Discovery Cadence Rules

  • Minimum: 3 user conversations per week (not internal stakeholders)
  • Mix: 40% current users, 30% churned/lost deals, 30% prospects
  • Format: 30-min calls, open-ended questions, no selling
  • Artifact: Interview summary within 24 hours
  • Interview Script Template

    Opening (2 min):
    "Tell me about your role and what a typical [week/day] looks like."

    Context (5 min): "Walk me through the last time you [relevant task]. What happened?" "What tools/processes do you use for [area]?"

    Problem Exploration (10 min): "What's the hardest part about [area]?" "Why is that hard?" (ask 5 times — 5 Whys) "What have you tried to solve this?" "What happened when you tried [solution]?"

    Impact (5 min): "How much time/money does this cost you?" "If this was solved tomorrow, what would change?" "Who else cares about this problem?"

    Wrap (3 min): "Is there anything I should have asked but didn't?" "Can you introduce me to anyone else who faces this?"

    Interview Synthesis Template

    interview:
      date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
      participant: "[Name, Role, Company]"
      segment: "[ICP segment]"
      key_quotes:
        - quote: "[Exact words]"
          context: "[What prompted this]"
          theme: "[pain | workflow | wishlist | competitor]"
      jobs_to_be_done:
        - job: "[When I [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [outcome]]"
          frequency: "[daily | weekly | monthly | quarterly]"
          current_solution: "[How they do it today]"
          satisfaction: "[1-5 scale]"
      pain_points:
        - pain: "[Description]"
          severity: "[1-5]"
          frequency: "[1-5]"
          workaround: "[What they do instead]"
      insights:
        - "[Non-obvious finding]"
      follow_up: "[Next step with this person]"
    

    Pattern Recognition

    After 5+ interviews, synthesize:
  • Universal pains (80%+ mention) → must-solve
  • Common pains (40-80%) → should-solve
  • Niche pains (<40%) → segment-specific, defer unless high-value
  • Contradictions → different segments, investigate
  • Validation Methods (by confidence needed)

    | Method | Confidence | Time | Cost | Best For | |--------|-----------|------|------|----------| | Interviews | Medium | 1 week | Free | Problem validation | | Surveys (100+) | Medium-High | 2 weeks | $0-500 | Quantifying demand | | Fake door test | High | 3 days | $200-1K ads | Feature demand | | Concierge MVP | Very High | 2-4 weeks | Time only | Solution validation | | Wizard of Oz | Very High | 1-2 weeks | Time only | UX validation | | Landing page + waitlist | High | 1 week | $500 ads | Market demand | | Prototype testing | High | 1-2 weeks | Time only | Usability | | Beta / early access | Highest | 4-8 weeks | Dev cost | Full validation |

    Rule: Never skip straight to building. Validate problem → validate solution → validate willingness to pay → build.


    Phase 3: Prioritization

    RICE+ Framework (Enhanced)

    Score every feature candidate:

    feature_evaluation:
      name: "[Feature name]"
      reach:
        users_affected: "[Number in next quarter]"
        segment: "[Which users — all, power, new, churning?]"
        score: "[1-10]"
      impact:
        on_north_star: "[Direct | Indirect | None]"
        magnitude: "[3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal]"
        confidence: "[High=1.0 | Medium=0.5 | Low=0.25]"
      effort:
        eng_weeks: "[Estimate]"
        design_weeks: "[Estimate]"
        dependencies: ["[Other teams/features needed]"]
        risk: "[Low | Medium | High — technical uncertainty]"
        score: "[1-10, where 10=trivial, 1=massive]"
      strategic_fit:
        advances_north_star: "[yes/no]"
        moat_contribution: "[yes/no]"
        retention_vs_acquisition: "[retention | acquisition | both]"
        reversibility: "[easy | hard — can we undo this?]"
        score: "[1-5]"
      rice_plus_score: "[reach × impact × confidence × strategic_fit / effort]"
    

    Prioritization Decision Matrix

    | Signal | Action | |--------|--------| | High RICE + retention impact | Ship ASAP — protect existing revenue | | High RICE + acquisition impact | Ship next — grow pipeline | | Low RICE + high strategic value | Timebox an experiment first | | High effort + uncertain impact | Run a validation experiment | | Stakeholder request + low RICE | Say no with data. Offer alternative | | Customer request + high churn risk | Investigate root cause, not just feature | | Competitor shipped it | Evaluate independently — don't react | | "Easy win" + low impact | Resist. Small things compound into distraction |

    Saying No Framework

    1. Acknowledge: "I understand why this matters to you." 2. Data: "Here's what our prioritization shows..." 3. Trade-off: "To do this, we'd need to drop [X]. Here's the impact." 4. Alternative: "What if we [lighter solution] instead?" 5. Revisit: "Let's re-evaluate in [timeframe] with [data]."


    Phase 4: Roadmapping

    Roadmap Structure (Now/Next/Later)

    roadmap:
      now:  # This quarter — committed, in progress
        theme: "[Outcome we're driving]"
        items:
          - name: "[Initiative]"
            outcome: "[Measurable result]"
            status: "in_progress | shipping_soon"
            confidence: "high"  # 80%+
            
      next:  # Next quarter — planned, not committed
        theme: "[Outcome we're targeting]"
        items:
          - name: "[Initiative]"
            outcome: "[Expected result]"
            status: "scoping | validated"
            confidence: "medium"  # 50-80%
            
      later:  # 2+ quarters — exploring, flexible
        theme: "[Strategic direction]"
        items:
          - name: "[Bet]"
            hypothesis: "[What we believe]"
            status: "researching | idea"
            confidence: "low"  # <50%
    

    Roadmap Communication Rules

    1. Never promise dates for "next" and "later" — use time horizons 2. Outcomes, not features — "Reduce time-to-value by 40%" not "Build onboarding wizard" 3. Update monthly — stale roadmaps are worse than no roadmap 4. Version it — stakeholders should see what changed and why 5. One page max — if it needs a scroll, it's too detailed 6. Confidence levels are mandatory — underpromise, overdeliver

    Roadmap Anti-Patterns

  • ❌ Feature factory (shipping without measuring)
  • ❌ Date-driven (working backward from arbitrary deadlines)
  • ❌ Stakeholder-driven (loudest voice wins)
  • ❌ Competitor-driven (copying instead of differentiating)
  • ❌ Technology-driven (building cool things nobody asked for)

  • Phase 5: Specifications & Requirements

    One-Pager (for every initiative)

    one_pager:
      title: "[Initiative name]"
      author: "[PM name]"
      date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
      status: "draft | review | approved"
      
      problem:
        statement: "[1-2 sentences]"
        evidence: "[User quotes, data, support tickets]"
        who_affected: "[Persona + count]"
        impact_of_not_solving: "[What happens if we don't build this]"
        
      solution:
        summary: "[1-2 sentences]"
        key_user_flows:
          - "[Step 1 → Step 2 → Outcome]"
        out_of_scope:
          - "[Explicitly excluded]"
        
      success_metrics:
        primary: "[Metric + target + timeframe]"
        secondary: ["[Supporting metric]"]
        guardrail: "[Metric that must NOT decrease]"
        
      risks:
        - risk: "[What could go wrong]"
          likelihood: "[low | medium | high]"
          mitigation: "[What we'll do about it]"
          
      effort:
        t_shirt: "[XS | S | M | L | XL]"
        team: ["[Eng]", "[Design]", "[Data]"]
        dependencies: ["[Other teams/services]"]
        
      timeline:
        target_ship: "[Quarter]"
        milestones:
          - "[Milestone 1 — date]"
    

    User Story Format

    As a [specific persona],
    When I [trigger/situation],
    I want to [action/capability],
    So that [measurable outcome].

    Acceptance Criteria:

  • GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]
  • GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]
  • Edge case: [scenario] → [expected behavior]
  • NOT in scope:

  • [Explicit exclusion]
  • Definition of Done:

  • [ ] All AC pass in QA
  • [ ] Analytics events fire correctly
  • [ ] Error states handled gracefully
  • [ ] Mobile/responsive verified
  • [ ] Performance: [specific threshold]
  • [ ] Accessibility: [specific standard]
  • Spec Quality Checklist (score /20)

  • [ ] Problem is validated with user evidence (not assumed) — 3pts
  • [ ] Success metric is specific and measurable — 3pts
  • [ ] Out of scope is explicit — 2pts
  • [ ] Edge cases listed — 2pts
  • [ ] Error states defined — 2pts
  • [ ] Mobile/responsive considered — 1pt
  • [ ] Accessibility requirements stated — 1pt
  • [ ] Performance requirements stated — 1pt
  • [ ] Analytics requirements listed — 1pt
  • [ ] Dependencies identified — 1pt
  • [ ] Risks and mitigations listed — 1pt
  • [ ] Design mockups linked — 1pt
  • [ ] Engineering reviewed and estimated — 1pt
  • Below 14/20 → spec is not ready for development.


    Phase 6: Execution & Shipping

    Sprint Planning Rules

    1. Capacity: Never plan above 70% of theoretical capacity 2. Buffer: 20% for bugs/incidents, 10% for exploration 3. Stories: Break to 1-3 day chunks max — anything bigger is underspecified 4. Dependencies: Surface in planning, not mid-sprint 5. Demo: Every sprint ends with a demo — no exceptions

    Daily Decisions (PM Calendar)

    | Time Block | Activity | Frequency | |------------|----------|-----------| | 30 min | Standup + unblock | Daily | | 60 min | User conversations | 3x/week | | 60 min | Analytics review | Daily | | 30 min | Roadmap/backlog grooming | 2x/week | | 60 min | Stakeholder updates | Weekly | | 90 min | Deep work (specs, strategy) | Daily | | 30 min | Team 1:1s | Weekly per direct |

    Launch Checklist

  • [ ] Success metrics baseline captured
  • [ ] Feature flag configured
  • [ ] Rollout plan: % ramp + timeline
  • [ ] Rollback plan documented
  • [ ] Support team briefed
  • [ ] Help docs / changelog updated
  • [ ] Internal announcement sent
  • [ ] Analytics verified in staging
  • [ ] Load/performance tested if applicable
  • [ ] Legal/compliance reviewed if applicable
  • Post-Launch Review (Week 2)

    post_launch:
      feature: "[Name]"
      ship_date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
      metrics:
        primary:
          target: "[What we aimed for]"
          actual: "[What happened]"
          verdict: "hit | miss | too_early"
        secondary:
          - metric: "[Name]"
            result: "[Value]"
        guardrail:
          - metric: "[Name]"
            status: "healthy | degraded"
      user_feedback:
        positive: ["[Theme]"]
        negative: ["[Theme]"]
        surprising: ["[Unexpected finding]"]
      decisions:
        - "[Keep | Iterate | Kill | Expand]"
      learnings:
        - "[What we'd do differently]"
    


    Phase 7: Metrics & Analytics

    North Star Framework

    metrics:
      north_star:
        metric: "[Single metric that captures core value delivery]"
        target: "[Specific number + timeframe]"
        leading_indicators:
          - name: "[Metric]"
            target: "[Value]"
            owner: "[Team]"
            update_frequency: "daily | weekly"
          - name: "[Metric]"
            target: "[Value]"
            owner: "[Team]"
        guardrails:
          - name: "[Metric that must NOT decrease]"
            threshold: "[Alert if below X]"
        input_metrics:
          breadth: "[How many users engage]"
          depth: "[How much they engage]"
          frequency: "[How often they engage]"
          efficiency: "[How fast they get value]"
    

    North Star by Business Type

    | Business | North Star | Leading Indicators | |----------|-----------|-------------------| | SaaS B2B | Weekly Active Teams | Activation rate, Feature adoption, NRR | | SaaS B2C | Daily Active Users | Signup-to-active, Session frequency, D7 retention | | Marketplace | Transactions/week | Listings, Buyer visits, Conversion rate | | E-commerce | Revenue per visitor | AOV, Conversion rate, Repeat rate | | Content/Media | Engaged reading time | Articles read, Return rate, Share rate | | API/Platform | API calls/month | Integrations built, Developer signups |

    Metrics Review Cadence

    | Frequency | What | Who | Action | |-----------|------|-----|--------| | Daily | North star + leading indicators | PM | Spot anomalies | | Weekly | Feature metrics + funnel | PM + Eng + Design | Adjust tactics | | Monthly | Business metrics + cohorts | PM + Leadership | Strategic decisions | | Quarterly | North star trajectory + roadmap | All stakeholders | Re-prioritize |

    Cohort Analysis Template

    Track every cohort (signup week/month):
  • Activation: % who complete setup within 7 days
  • Engagement: Actions per active user in Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12
  • Retention: % still active at Day 7, 14, 30, 60, 90
  • Revenue: ARPU at Month 1, 3, 6, 12
  • Expansion: % who upgrade within 90 days
  • Healthy SaaS benchmarks:

  • D7 retention: >60%
  • D30 retention: >40%
  • D90 retention: >25%
  • Activation rate: >40%
  • Time to value: <5 minutes for self-serve

  • Phase 8: Stakeholder Management

    Stakeholder Map

    stakeholders:
      - name: "[Person]"
        role: "[Title]"
        influence: "[high | medium | low]"
        interest: "[high | medium | low]"
        strategy: "[manage_closely | keep_satisfied | keep_informed | monitor]"
        communication:
          frequency: "[weekly | biweekly | monthly]"
          format: "[1:1 | email | slack | dashboard]"
        concerns: ["[What they care about]"]
        wins: ["[What makes them look good]"]
    

    Update Templates

    Weekly Status (for "manage closely" stakeholders):

    📊 Product Update — Week of [date]

    ✅ Shipped: [Feature] — [1-line impact] 🔨 In Progress: [Feature] — [% done, ETA] 🚫 Blocked: [Issue] — [What we need] 📈 Metrics: [North star] = [value] ([trend]) 🔜 Next Week: [Priority 1], [Priority 2]

    Quarterly Business Review: 1. Results vs targets (with charts) 2. Key wins + learnings 3. What we learned from users 4. Next quarter priorities + rationale 5. Resource asks (if any) 6. Open discussion


    Phase 9: Product-Led Growth

    Activation Framework

    activation:
      aha_moment: "[The moment user gets core value]"
      critical_path:
        - step: "[Action 1]"
          target_completion: "[% and time]"
          drop_off_fix: "[If users bail here, do X]"
        - step: "[Action 2]"
          target_completion: "[%]"
          drop_off_fix: "[Fix]"
      time_to_value:
        target: "[Minutes/hours to aha moment]"
        current: "[Actual measurement]"
      onboarding_type: "[self-serve | guided | hybrid | white-glove]"
      
      triggers:
        activation_nudge:
          condition: "User signed up but hasn't [action] in 24h"
          action: "Email with [specific help]"
        at_risk:
          condition: "Active user goes silent for 7 days"
          action: "[Re-engagement sequence]"
    

    Viral Loop Design

    1. Natural sharing: user gets value → wants to share → recipient gets value → signs up 2. Collaboration hook: product is better with teammates 3. Content creation: user creates something shareable (reports, dashboards, designs) 4. Integration: connects to tools others see 5. K-factor target: >0.5 (each user brings 0.5 new users)

    Pricing & Packaging Principles

  • Free tier: enough value to activate, limited enough to upgrade
  • Upgrade trigger: aligned with value delivery (not arbitrary limits)
  • Pricing metric: scales with value received (seats, usage, revenue)
  • Annual discount: 15-20% (improves retention + cash flow)
  • Enterprise: custom pricing at >$50K ACV

  • Phase 10: Cross-Functional Leadership

    Working with Engineering

  • Context, not tickets: Explain the why — let eng figure out the how
  • Trade-off conversations: "If we cut X, can we ship by Y?"
  • Tech debt budget: Protect 15-20% of capacity for tech debt
  • Estimation trust: Accept estimates, negotiate scope
  • On-call respect: If eng is firefighting, roadmap waits
  • Working with Design

  • Co-discovery: Research together, don't hand off requirements
  • Critique framework: "What problem does this solve?" not "I don't like it"
  • Design reviews: With users in the room (not just stakeholders)
  • Design system: Support and enforce it — speeds everyone up
  • Working with Sales

  • Win/loss reviews: Monthly, with recording consent
  • Competitive intel sharing: Real-time channel for field insights
  • Feature request triage: Sales submits, PM scores, both discuss
  • "Not on roadmap" script: "We hear you. Here's what we're doing instead and why."
  • Custom deals: Never say yes without PM review of scope
  • Working with Customer Success

  • NPS/CSAT review: Monthly with CS, quarterly trends
  • Churn analysis: PM owns understanding, CS owns save plays
  • Feature adoption data: CS flags underused features
  • Voice of customer pipeline: CS → PM structured feedback channel

  • Phase 11: Product Sense & Frameworks

    Opportunity Sizing

    TAM: [Total addressable market — everyone who could use this]
    SAM: [Serviceable addressable — our segment of TAM]
    SOM: [Serviceable obtainable — realistic capture in 3 years]

    Bottom-up validation: [Number of target companies] × [seats per company] × [price per seat] × [conversion rate] = [Revenue estimate]

    Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision

    | Factor | Build | Buy/Integrate | Partner | |--------|-------|---------------|---------| | Core to value prop | ✅ Build | ❌ | ❌ | | Commoditized | ❌ | ✅ Buy | ❌ | | Adjacent capability | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ Partner | | Speed critical | ❌ (slow) | ✅ (fast) | ✅ (fast) | | Control critical | ✅ | ❌ | ❌ | | Maintenance burden | High | Low | Shared |

    Technical Debt Classification

    | Type | Impact | Priority | Action | |------|--------|----------|--------| | Blocks features | Revenue | P0 | Sprint now | | Slows development | Velocity | P1 | Next sprint | | Creates incidents | Reliability | P1 | Next sprint | | Ugly but works | Pride | P3 | Backlog | | Theoretical concern | None yet | P4 | Ignore for now |

    Product Thinking Frameworks Quick Reference

    | Framework | When to Use | Core Question | |-----------|-------------|---------------| | Jobs to Be Done | Discovery | What job is the user hiring us for? | | Kano Model | Prioritization | Is this basic, performance, or delight? | | RICE | Scoring | What's the ROI of this investment? | | Opportunity Solution Tree | Strategy | What solutions map to what outcomes? | | Double Diamond | Process | Are we solving the right problem? | | Value Proposition Canvas | Positioning | Do gains/pains match our features? | | Pirate Metrics (AARRR) | Growth | Where's the funnel leaking? | | North Star | Alignment | What single metric matters most? |


    Phase 12: Advanced Patterns

    Platform / API Product Management

  • Developers are users too — discovery, interviews, friction audits apply
  • Docs are UI — if docs are bad, API is unusable
  • Breaking changes are product decisions — deprecation timeline = roadmap item
  • Adoption funnel: Discover → Register → First API call → Integration live → Expansion
  • Time to first API call = your activation metric
  • Multi-Product / Portfolio Management

  • Shared platform strategy: What's shared vs. product-specific?
  • Cannibalization analysis: Does new product steal from existing?
  • Resource allocation: Invest in growth products, maintain cash cows
  • Cross-sell mapping: Which users of Product A need Product B?
  • International / Localization

  • Market prioritization: Size × ease of entry × cultural fit
  • Localization vs. translation: Adapt the product, not just the words
  • Regulatory differences: Privacy, data residency, payments
  • Local competition: Incumbents may be stronger than global view suggests
  • AI/ML Feature Product Management

  • Set expectations: ML is probabilistic — "usually right" not "always right"
  • Feedback loops: Users correct outputs → model improves → users trust more
  • Confidence thresholds: Show/hide based on model confidence
  • Fallback UX: What happens when the model fails?
  • Bias audits: Check outputs across user segments regularly
  • Cost per inference: Factor into unit economics
  • Rescue Playbook (Failing Product)

    1. Diagnose: Is it demand, execution, or market timing? 2. Talk to churned users: 5 calls in 5 days — why did they leave? 3. Find the 10%: Who ARE the happy users? What do they have in common? 4. Narrow focus: Kill everything except what serves the happy 10% 5. Set a deadline: 90 days to hit a clear milestone or sunset


    100-Point Quality Rubric

    Score any product initiative across 8 dimensions:

    | Dimension | Weight | 1 (Poor) | 3 (Good) | 5 (Excellent) | |-----------|--------|----------|----------|----------------| | Problem clarity | 20% | Assumed, no evidence | Some user quotes | Quantified with multiple sources | | User understanding | 15% | No research | Surveys only | Regular interviews + data | | Prioritization rigor | 15% | Gut feel | Basic scoring | RICE+ with strategic alignment | | Spec completeness | 15% | Vague requirements | Stories + AC | Full spec with edge cases | | Metrics discipline | 15% | No tracking | Vanity metrics | North star + leading + guardrails | | Execution quality | 10% | Ship and pray | QA + rollout plan | Feature flags + monitoring + rollback | | Stakeholder alignment | 5% | Surprises | Regular updates | Proactive partnership | | Learning velocity | 5% | No post-mortems | Quarterly reviews | Weekly metrics + iteration |

    Score: (Σ dimension_score × weight) × 4 = /100

    Below 60 = significant gaps. 60-80 = good with room to improve. Above 80 = strong PM practice.


    Common PM Mistakes

    | Mistake | Fix | |---------|-----| | Building what stakeholders request | Build what moves the north star | | Shipping without measuring | Define success metric BEFORE building | | Features without adoption plan | Activation strategy for every feature | | Spec during sprint | Spec BEFORE sprint — always one sprint ahead | | Saying "we'll add it later" | If it's not in V1 scope, don't promise | | Consensus-seeking | Disagree and commit — decisions > meetings | | Roadmap = feature list | Roadmap = outcome targets | | Competing on features | Compete on experience and speed | | Ignoring churned users | Churned users are your best teachers | | Big bang launches | Progressive rollouts with feature flags |


    Natural Language Commands

  • /pm strategy — Generate a strategy brief for a product/feature
  • /pm discovery — Create an interview script for a research question
  • /pm prioritize — Score a list of features using RICE+
  • /pm roadmap — Build a Now/Next/Later roadmap
  • /pm spec — Write a one-pager or user stories for a feature
  • /pm launch — Generate a launch checklist
  • /pm metrics — Design a north star framework
  • /pm review — Run a post-launch review
  • /pm stakeholder — Map stakeholders and communication plan
  • /pm health — Score current PM practice /80
  • /pm rescue — Diagnose and plan for a struggling product
  • /pm compete — Analyze competitive positioning

  • File Structure

    product/
    ├── strategy.yaml          # Product strategy brief
    ├── roadmap.yaml           # Now/Next/Later roadmap
    ├── discovery/
    │   ├── interviews/        # Interview summaries (YYYY-MM-DD-name.yaml)
    │   ├── synthesis.md       # Pattern analysis
    │   └── validation-log.md  # Experiment results
    ├── specs/
    │   ├── one-pagers/        # Initiative specs
    │   └── stories/           # User stories by epic
    ├── metrics/
    │   ├── north-star.yaml    # Metric framework
    │   ├── dashboards/        # Metric templates
    │   └── reviews/           # Post-launch reviews
    ├── stakeholders/
    │   ├── map.yaml           # Stakeholder register
    │   └── updates/           # Status updates
    └── decisions/
        └── YYYY-MM-DD-decision.md  # Key product decisions with rationale
    


    *Built by AfrexAI — AI-powered business operations.*