Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
A direct command skips the review prompt. Inspect the source before running it.
Design a new PM skill through guided conversation. Use when you have raw content or an idea and want to shape it into a compliant skill.
intent
Walk through the full skill design process interactively — from raw idea or content to a structured, repo-compliant SKILL.md draft. Asks adaptive questions to determine skill type, scope, structure, and content, then generates a ready-to-validate draft.
type
interactive
theme
meta-authoring
best_for
["Turning a rough idea or framework into a structured PM skill","Deciding whether raw content should be a component, interactive, or workflow skill","Getting from blank page to a complete SKILL.md draft through guided conversation"]
scenarios
["I have notes from a workshop and want to turn them into a skill","Help me create a new skill — I know the topic but not the structure","I have a PM framework I want to formalize as a repo skill"]
estimated_time
10-15 min
Purpose
Walk through the full skill design process interactively — from raw idea or content to a structured, repo-compliant SKILL.md draft. Asks adaptive questions to determine skill type, scope, structure, and content, then generates a ready-to-validate draft.
This skill sits with you and figures out what to build before you build it — shaping a raw idea or content into the right structure through conversation, then generating a draft you can validate.
Key Concepts
The Three Skill Types (Decision Criteria)
Component: One artifact or template. Self-contained. Gets referenced by other skills. Ask: "Is this a thing someone creates?"
Interactive: Guided conversation with adaptive questions and enumerated recommendations. Ask: "Does this require back-and-forth to be useful?"
Workflow: Multi-phase orchestration referencing other skills. Ask: "Does this coordinate multiple activities across steps?"
Skill Anatomy (Non-Negotiable Sections)
Every skill requires these sections in order:
Purpose — What it does + when to use it (outcome-focused)
Application — Step-by-step instructions an agent can follow
Examples — At least one concrete, specific example
Common Pitfalls — Named failure modes with consequences and fixes
References — Related skills, external frameworks, source material
Metadata Constraints
name: lowercase kebab-case, ≤ 64 characters
description: ≤ 200 characters, must include trigger cue ("Use when...")
intent: longer repo-facing summary (no character limit)
type: one of component, interactive, workflow
Facilitation Protocol
Run this skill as a guided conversation using this interaction protocol:
Open with a one-line heads-up, then offer an entry mode: Guided (one question at a time), Context dump (the user pastes everything up front), or Best guess (proceed from the topic alone).
Ask one question per turn in plain language; wait for the answer before asking the next. Never bundle multiple questions.
Label progress on each question (e.g., Context Q1/5).
With each question, offer numbered response options and a recommended default; include Other (specify) when useful.
Handle interruptions gracefully and allow the user to pause and resume.
At decision points, present numbered recommendations rather than a single take.
Application
This interactive skill asks up to 5 adaptive questions, then delivers a complete SKILL.md draft with frontmatter, all required sections, and repo-compliant structure.
Step 0: Session Start
Agent says:
"I'll help you design a new PM skill from scratch. This takes about 10-15 minutes and up to 5 questions. How do you want to start?
Guided — I'll ask questions one at a time and build the skill from your answers (recommended)
Context dump — Paste your raw content, notes, or framework and I'll propose a skill structure
Best guess — Tell me just the topic and I'll draft a skill you can refine"
Question 1: What's the Raw Material? (Q1/5)
Agent asks:
"What are we turning into a skill? Give me whatever you have."
A framework or mental model — A structured way of thinking about a PM problem (e.g., prioritization matrix, decision tree)
A template or artifact — A deliverable PMs create (e.g., PRD section, positioning statement, epic format)
A process or workflow — A multi-step method for completing a PM task (e.g., discovery sprint, roadmap planning)
A coaching or advisory topic — A domain where PMs need guided, adaptive help (e.g., stakeholder navigation, pricing decisions)
Or describe what you have in your own words.
Agent note: If the user pastes raw content instead of choosing an option, analyze the content and infer the answer. Confirm your interpretation before proceeding.
Question 2: Skill Type Decision (Q2/5)
Based on Q1 answer, agent recommends a type and confirms:
If Q1 = Framework or Template:
"This sounds like a component skill — a self-contained artifact or reference. It would include a template, quality criteria, and examples. Does that fit, or is there a conversational/adaptive element I'm missing?
Yes, component — It's a standalone deliverable or reference
Actually, it needs conversation — Users need guided questions to use it well (→ interactive)
It's bigger than one artifact — It orchestrates multiple steps or other skills (→ workflow)"
If Q1 = Process or Workflow:
"This sounds like a workflow skill — a multi-phase process. Does it reference or orchestrate other discrete skills/artifacts, or is it more of a guided conversation?
Yes, workflow — It has distinct phases and may reference other skills
It's more conversational — The value comes from adaptive questions and recommendations (→ interactive)
It's simpler than I described — Really it's one artifact with steps (→ component)"
If Q1 = Coaching or Advisory:
"This sounds like an interactive skill — guided questions that adapt based on answers, ending with enumerated recommendations. Sound right?
Yes, interactive — It needs back-and-forth to be useful
It's more of a reference — Users just need the framework, not a conversation (→ component)
It's a full process — Multiple phases, orchestrates other skills (→ workflow)"
Question 3: Scope and Naming (Q3/5)
Agent asks:
"What should we call this skill? I need two things:
a) A working name — lowercase-kebab-case, max 64 characters (e.g., feature-investment-advisor, user-story, discovery-process)
b) A one-sentence description — What it does + when to use it. Must fit in 200 characters and start with a verb or 'Use when...'
Give me your best attempt and I'll tighten it if needed. Or just describe the skill's purpose and I'll propose both."
Agent note: Validate the name format (kebab-case, ≤ 64 chars) and description length (≤ 200 chars) before proceeding. If either fails, suggest a fix.
Question 4: Key Content (Q4/5)
This question adapts based on skill type from Q2:
For component skills:
"What are the core elements of this artifact or framework? I need:
The template or structure — What sections/fields does it contain?
Quality criteria — What separates a good one from a bad one?
One concrete example — A filled-in version showing it done well
Give me whatever you have — bullet points, rough notes, or a full draft."
For interactive skills:
"Walk me through the conversation flow:
What's the opening question? — What does the user need to tell you first?
What are the 2-4 branching paths? — How do answers change what comes next?
What recommendations emerge? — What are the 3-5 outcomes you'd offer?
Give me the decision tree as you see it — even if it's rough."
For workflow skills:
"Map out the phases:
What are the major steps? (Usually 3-6 phases)
What's the input and output of each phase?
Which existing skills does this reference? (Search your existing skills for any that already cover this topic before proceeding.)
Where are the decision points?
Give me the flow — sequential, branching, or both."
Question 5: Pitfalls and Edge Cases (Q5/5)
Agent asks:
"What goes wrong when people do this badly? I need 2-3 failure modes:
Name the failure — Give it a label (e.g., 'Metrics Theater', 'Hero Syndrome')
Describe the consequence — What happens when someone falls into this trap?
State the fix — What's the corrective action?
If you're not sure, tell me the most common mistake you've seen and I'll help structure it."
Draft Generation
After collecting answers to Q1-Q5, the agent generates a complete SKILL.md draft including:
Application — Step-by-step instructions derived from Q4
Examples — Concrete example from Q4 (or generated if not provided)
Common Pitfalls — Structured from Q5
References — Related skills identified during conversation + source material
Agent says after generating:
"Here's your draft SKILL.md. Before we call it done:
Review the draft — Does it capture your intent?
Validate the frontmatter — Confirm name and description are present and within limits (name ≤ 64 chars kebab-case, description ≤ 200 chars with a "Use when..." trigger cue).
Confirm structure and triggers — Verify all required sections are present and the description/triggers would actually match real user requests.
Check for overlap — Make sure this doesn't duplicate an existing skill.
Want me to adjust anything, or are you ready to validate?"
Examples
Example: Framework → Component Skill
Q1: "1 — A framework. It's a 2x2 matrix for evaluating build-vs-buy decisions."
Q2: "1 — Yes, component."
Q3: "Name: build-vs-buy-matrix. Description: 'Evaluate build-vs-buy decisions using a 2x2 matrix of strategic value and implementation complexity. Use when choosing between building internally and buying a solution.'"
Q4: "The axes are strategic differentiation (low/high) and implementation complexity (low/high). Four quadrants: Buy (low/low), Partner (low/high), Build (high/low), Invest (high/high). Quality criteria: each quadrant has a clear decision rule and one example."
Q5: "Biggest mistake: treating it as a one-time decision. Consequence: you build something, market shifts, and you're stuck maintaining undifferentiated tech. Fix: revisit quarterly."
Output: Complete component skill with template, filled example, and the quarterly-review pitfall.
Example: Advisory Topic → Interactive Skill
Q1: "4 — Coaching topic. Helping PMs navigate their first pricing conversation with leadership."
Q2: "1 — Yes, interactive."
Q3: "Name: pricing-conversation-advisor. Description: 'Prepare for your first pricing conversation with leadership. Use when presenting pricing changes or new monetization to executives.'"
Q4: "Opening question: What's the pricing change? Branches: new product pricing, price increase on existing, freemium-to-paid conversion, usage-based transition. Recommendations: data to bring, objection handling, framing strategies."
Q5: "Failure mode: 'Leading with the Number.' Consequence: executives fixate on the price point instead of the strategy. Fix: always lead with the business case and customer impact before revealing the number."
Output: Complete interactive skill with 3-question flow, 4 branches, and enumerated recommendations per branch.
Anti-Pattern: Scope Creep
Q1: "I want a skill that covers all of product strategy — vision, roadmaps, OKRs, prioritization, stakeholder alignment, and metrics."
Agent response: "That's 4-6 separate skills, not one. Let's pick the one that matters most right now and build that. Which piece is most urgent?
Symptom: Calling something a "workflow" when it's really a template with numbered steps.
Consequence: Over-engineered skill that references non-existent sub-skills and confuses users.
Fix: Apply the type decision questions from Q2 honestly. If it doesn't orchestrate other skills or have distinct phases with different inputs/outputs, it's probably a component.
Pitfall 2: Description That Doesn't Trigger
Symptom: Description says what the skill is ("A framework for pricing decisions") but not when to use it.
Consequence: Claude can't match user requests to the skill. It sits unused.
Fix: Every description must answer "Use when..." — e.g., "Evaluate pricing decisions using a structured framework. Use when choosing between pricing models or preparing a pricing proposal."
