القائمة
Turn the current conversation context into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker. Use when user wants to create a PRD from the current context.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Reconcile multiple plans for the same piece of work — written by different models or sessions (e.g. rubber-duck runs in Fable, Opus, Kimi, GPT) — into one final plan, finding where they agree and diverge, optionally convening a council of lens-based reviewers to judge them. Use when the user wants to compare, reconcile, or merge multiple plans, asks for a council, verdict, or second opinion across plans, mentions plan files like <model>-<topic>.md, or says they ran the same planning exercise in multiple sessions — even if they don't use the word "reconcile".
Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design, one question at a time, until reaching shared understanding — resolving each branch of the decision tree. When the project documents its domain (CONTEXT.md, ADRs), challenge the plan against that language and capture decisions inline. Use when the user wants to stress-test a plan or an issue, asks your opinion on a plan or design, or mentions "rubber-duck" / "rubberducking".
Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test. Use when user says "diagnose this" / "debug this", reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, or describes a performance regression.
Find deepening opportunities in a codebase, informed by the domain language in CONTEXT.md and the decisions in docs/adr/. Use when the user wants to improve architecture, find refactoring opportunities, consolidate tightly-coupled modules, or make a codebase more testable and AI-navigable.
Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
Break a plan, spec, or PRD into independently-grabbable issues on the project issue tracker using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
| name | to-prd |
| description | Turn the current conversation context into a PRD and publish it to the project issue tracker. Use when user wants to create a PRD from the current context. |
| source | https://github.com/mattpocock/skills |
| source_path | skills/engineering/to-spec |
| upstream_ref | 9603c1cc8118d08bc1b3bf34cf714f62178dea3b |
| last_reviewed | "2026-07-17T00:00:00.000Z" |
This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a PRD. Do NOT interview the user — just synthesize what you already know.
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you — run /marshal if not.
Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the PRD, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
Sketch out the major modules you will need to build or modify to complete the implementation. Actively look for opportunities to extract deep modules that can be tested in isolation.
A deep module (as opposed to a shallow module) is one which encapsulates a lot of functionality in a simple, testable interface which rarely changes.
Check with the user that these modules match their expectations. Check with the user which modules they want tests written for.
new provenance label so the PRD is identifiable as agent-created. It enters the inbox state automatically (no state label means inbox).The problem that the user is facing, from the user's perspective.
The solution to the problem, from the user's perspective.
A LONG, numbered list of user stories. Each user story should be in the format of:
This list of user stories should be extremely extensive and cover all aspects of the feature.
A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it within the relevant decision and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts — not a working demo, just the important bits.
A list of testing decisions that were made. Include:
A description of the things that are out of scope for this PRD.
Any further notes about the feature.