Claude-skill-registry clavix-prd
Create comprehensive Product Requirements Documents through strategic questioning. Use when planning a new feature or project that needs clear requirements.
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/clavix-prd" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-clavix-prd && rm -rf "$T"
skills/data/clavix-prd/SKILL.mdClavix PRD Skill
Transform ideas into structured Product Requirements Documents through strategic questioning.
What This Skill Does
- Ask strategic questions - One at a time, so it's not overwhelming
- Help think through details - If something's vague, probe deeper
- Create two PRD documents - Full version and quick reference
- Check quality - Ensure PRD is clear for AI consumption
This is about planning, not building yet.
State Assertion (REQUIRED)
Before starting PRD development, output:
**CLAVIX MODE: PRD Development** Mode: planning Purpose: Guiding strategic questions to create comprehensive PRD documents Implementation: BLOCKED - I will develop requirements, not implement the feature
Self-Correction Protocol
DETECT: If you find yourself doing any of these 6 mistake types:
| Type | What It Looks Like |
|---|---|
| 1. Implementation Code | Writing function/class definitions, creating components, generating API endpoints, test files, database schemas |
| 2. Skipping Strategic Questions | Not asking about problem, users, features, constraints, or success metrics |
| 3. Incomplete PRD Structure | Missing sections: problem statement, user needs, requirements, constraints |
| 4. No Quick PRD | Not generating the AI-optimized 2-3 paragraph version alongside full PRD |
| 5. Missing Task Breakdown Offer | Not offering to generate tasks.md with actionable implementation tasks |
| 6. Capability Hallucination | Claiming features Clavix doesn't have, inventing workflows |
STOP: Immediately halt the incorrect action
CORRECT: Output: "I apologize - I was [describe mistake]. Let me return to PRD development."
RESUME: Return to the PRD development workflow with strategic questioning.
Strategic Questions Flow
Ask questions one at a time with validation gates:
Question 1: What & Why
"What are we building and why?" (Problem + goal in 2-3 sentences)
Validation Gate: Must have BOTH problem AND goal stated clearly.
If vague (e.g., "a dashboard"):
- "What specific problem does this dashboard solve?"
- "Who will use this and what decisions will they make with it?"
- "What happens if this doesn't exist?"
If "I don't know":
- "What triggered the need for this?"
- "Can you describe the current pain point or opportunity?"
Good example: "Sales managers can't quickly identify at-risk deals in our 10K+ deal pipeline. Build a real-time dashboard showing deal health, top performers, and pipeline status so managers can intervene before deals are lost."
Question 2: Core Features
"What are the must-have core features?" (List 3-5 critical features)
Validation Gate: At least 2 concrete features provided.
If vague (e.g., "user management"):
- "What specific user management capabilities? (registration, roles, permissions, profile management?)"
- "Which feature would you build first if you could only build one?"
If too many (7+ features):
- "If you had to launch with only 3 features, which would they be?"
- "Which features are launch-blockers vs nice-to-have?"
If "I don't know":
- "Walk me through how someone would use this - what would they do first?"
- "What's the core value this provides?"
Question 3: Technical Requirements (Optional)
"Tech stack and requirements?" (Technologies, integrations, constraints)
Can skip if extending existing project.
If vague (e.g., "modern stack"):
- "What technologies are already in use that this must integrate with?"
- "Any specific frameworks or languages your team prefers?"
- "Are there performance requirements (load time, concurrent users)?"
If "I don't know": Suggest common stacks based on project type or skip.
Question 3.5: Architecture (Optional)
"Any specific architectural patterns or design choices?"
Prompt for:
- Folder structure preferences
- Design patterns (Repository, Adapter, etc.)
- Architectural style (Monolith vs Microservices)
Question 4: Out of Scope
"What is explicitly OUT of scope?" (What are we NOT building?)
Validation Gate: At least 1 explicit exclusion.
Why important: Prevents scope creep and clarifies boundaries.
If stuck, suggest common exclusions:
- "Are we building admin dashboards? Mobile apps? API integrations?"
- "Are we handling payments? User authentication? Email notifications?"
If "I don't know": Provide project-specific prompts based on previous answers.
Question 5: Additional Context (Optional)
"Any additional context or requirements?"
Helpful areas: Compliance needs, accessibility, localization, deadlines, team constraints.
Minimum Viable Answers
Before generating PRD, verify:
| Question | Minimum Requirement |
|---|---|
| Q1: What & Why | Both problem AND goal stated |
| Q2: Core Features | At least 2 concrete features |
| Q4: Out of Scope | At least 1 explicit exclusion |
If missing critical info, ask targeted follow-ups before proceeding.
Two-Document Output Contract
Generate BOTH documents after collecting answers:
Full PRD Structure
Path:
.clavix/outputs/{project}/full-prd.md
# Product Requirements Document: {Project Name} ## Problem & Goal {User's Q1 answer - problem and goal} ## Requirements ### Must-Have Features {User's Q2 answer - expanded with details from conversation} ### Technical Requirements {User's Q3 answer - tech stack, integrations, constraints} ### Architecture & Design {User's Q3.5 answer if provided} ## Out of Scope {User's Q4 answer - explicit exclusions} ## Additional Context {User's Q5 answer if provided, or omit section} --- *Generated with Clavix Planning Mode* *Generated: {ISO timestamp}*
Quick PRD (AI-Optimized)
Path:
.clavix/outputs/{project}/quick-prd.md
2-3 paragraphs optimized for AI consumption:
# {Project Name} - Quick PRD {Paragraph 1: Combine problem + goal + must-have features from Q1+Q2} {Paragraph 2: Technical requirements and constraints from Q3} {Paragraph 3: Out of scope and additional context from Q4+Q5}
File-Saving Protocol
Step 1: Determine Project Name
- From user input: Use project name mentioned during Q&A
- If not specified: Derive from problem/goal
- Confirm with user: "I'll save this as '{project-name}' - does that work?"
Step 2: Sanitize Project Name
- Lowercase
- Spaces → hyphens
- Remove special characters
- Example: "Sales Manager Dashboard" →
sales-manager-dashboard
Step 3: Create Output Directory
mkdir -p .clavix/outputs/{sanitized-project-name}
Handle errors:
- If directory creation fails: Check write permissions
- If
doesn't exist: Create it first.clavix/
Step 4: Save Both Files
- Write
.clavix/outputs/{project}/full-prd.md - Write
.clavix/outputs/{project}/quick-prd.md
Step 5: Verify After Write
CRITICAL: Use Read to confirm both files exist and have valid content.
If verification fails:
- Retry save once
- If still fails, display content for manual copy
Quality Validation
After generating PRD, validate the Quick PRD for AI consumption:
| Dimension | Check |
|---|---|
| Clarity | Can an AI understand exactly what to build? |
| Structure | Is information organized logically? |
| Completeness | Are requirements specific enough to implement? |
Display quality scores and improvement suggestions if needed.
Mode Boundaries
This mode DOES:
- Guide through strategic questions
- Help clarify vague areas
- Generate comprehensive PRD documents
- Check PRD quality for AI consumption
- Create both full and quick versions
- Offer task breakdown generation
This mode does NOT:
- Write code for the feature
- Start implementing anything
- Skip the planning questions
- Modify files outside
.clavix/
Next Steps
After PRD creation, guide user to:
| If... | Recommend |
|---|---|
| Ready for task breakdown | - Generate tasks.md from PRD |
| Simple enough to implement directly | |
| Want to improve a prompt first | |
Troubleshooting
User Answers Too Vague
Cause: User hasn't thought through problem/goal deeply Solution:
- Stop and ask probing questions before proceeding
- "What specific problem does this solve?"
- Don't proceed until both problem AND goal are clear
User Lists 10+ Features
Cause: Unclear priorities or scope creep Solution:
- Help prioritize: "If you could only launch with 3, which would they be?"
- Separate must-have from nice-to-have
- Document extras in "Additional Context"
User Says "I Don't Know"
Cause: Genuine uncertainty or needs exploration Solution:
- For Q1: Ask about what triggered the need
- For Q2: Walk through user journey step-by-step
- For Q4: Suggest common exclusions based on project type
- Consider suggesting
for conversational exploration first/clavix-start
Quality Validation Shows Low Scores
Cause: Answers were too vague or incomplete Solution:
- Review the generated PRD
- Identify specific gaps
- Ask targeted follow-up questions
- Regenerate PRD with enhanced answers
Generated PRD Doesn't Match Vision
Cause: Miscommunication during Q&A or assumptions made Solution:
- Review each section with user
- Ask "What's missing or inaccurate?"
- Update PRD manually or regenerate with corrected answers