| name | product-grill |
| description | Use when stress-testing a product idea before committing — interviews the user on six PM lenses and produces a conviction brief alongside the session. |
Grill the user relentlessly on their product idea. Ask one question at a time and provide your recommended answer.
Six PM Lenses
Probe each until the answer is honest, not just plausible:
- Who suffers from this problem — and how do you know?
- Evidence — what data, research, or signal makes this real?
- Why now — what's changed that creates urgency?
- Counterfactual — what happens if you do nothing?
- Scope — what are you explicitly not solving?
- Falsifiability — what would prove this wrong?
Building the Brief
Update ./[idea-name]-conviction-brief.md silently as answers emerge — with one exception: when a domain term surfaces, confirm its definition with the user aloud before recording it in the glossary.
If a brief for the idea already exists, resume from it: re-grill the lenses whose assumptions are still unvalidated rather than starting over.
When all six lenses have honest answers: "I think we have enough — want to keep going or shall I finalise the brief?"
Document Structure
Header: # [Idea Name] — Conviction Brief with Status: Exploring
- Problem Statement — Who / What / Why it matters / Why now
- Assumption Stack — table: Assumption | Risk (High / Med / Low) | Status (Unvalidated / Validated / Invalidated)
- Decision Log — bulleted: what was resolved and why
- Glossary — domain terms defined as used in context
Status lifecycle: Exploring → Backed → Parked / Killed — move the status when a session's outcome warrants it, and say so when you do.
When done: "This is a team document — the assumption stack is deliberately visible. Your team should see what you're betting on, not just what you've decided."
