| name | polyflow-prd |
| description | Synthesize a PRD (Product Requirements Document) for a big new feature. Synthesis (not interview) — uses existing project context and explicit ADRs. Asks before gh issue create. Use when scoping a substantial new feature in PRD shape (e.g., before a sprint). |
PolyFlow: PRD
Vocabulary
See polyflow meta-skill.
When to Use
- Substantial new feature requiring stakeholder alignment
- Pre-sprint scoping
- A spec exists in conversation but needs structured form for the team
SKIP when: the work is small enough for polyflow-brainstorming → polyflow-writing-plans directly.
The Flow
1. Read Context (don't interview)
The skill name is "to-prd" not "interview-to-prd" for a reason. Synthesize from what's already known:
CLAUDE.md for project conventions
CONTEXT.md for domain language
docs/adr/ for prior architectural decisions
- Recent commits and
docs/stakeholder/*.md for in-flight initiatives
- The conversation up to this point
Only ask the user for things you genuinely cannot derive.
2. Identify Major Modules
Sketch the modules to build/modify, emphasizing deep modules (small interface, complex internals). Apply the deletion test to each — does this module earn its existence?
3. Validate Architecture
Confirm with the user:
- The module list (correct, exhaustive, no gaps)
- Which components require test coverage (you can't test everything)
- Which existing patterns to follow vs. diverge from
4. Write the PRD
Default location: docs/specs/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature>.md. Use the user's preferred path if they have one.
Structure:
# [Feature Name] PRD
## Problem
One paragraph: what's broken or missing in the current product, and who feels the pain.
## Solution
One paragraph: the shape of the answer, named in domain language.
## User stories
- As a <role>, I can <action> so that <outcome>.
- (List 5-15)
## Architecture
Module list with one-line responsibility per module. Reference existing files where relevant. No code paths.
## Testing strategy
What behaviors must be covered. Integration vs. unit. Real services vs. test doubles.
## Scope
In:
- ...
Out:
- ...
## Open questions
Things needing decision before the plan can be written.
5. Optional: Create GitHub Issue
If the user wants the PRD as a GitHub issue, ASK before running gh issue create. Never auto-file.
Hard Rules
- Synthesize, don't interrogate. Ask only for genuinely unknown things.
- Domain language from
CONTEXT.md. Use canonical terms.
- External behavior over implementation. Testing strategy describes what to verify, not how.
- Asks before
gh issue create. No auto-file.
- Never auto-commit. PRD doc gets staged; user confirms before commit.
Hand-offs
- PRD approved, ready for plan →
polyflow-writing-plans.
- New domain terms emerged →
polyflow-glossary to update CONTEXT.md
- PRD reveals architecture concerns →
polyflow-improve-architecture first
- PRD's interface design needs more thought →
polyflow-design-interface before plan