prd

name	prd
description	Use when capturing product requirements for features, improvements, or bugs before brainstorming or implementation. Triggered by "create a PRD", "capture requirements", "document requirements", "write a PRD", or /prd.
tier	workflow
alwaysApply	false

PRD Author

PURPOSE: Collaboratively author structured Product Requirements Documents that serve as enforceable specs for both human reviewers and downstream AI agents (spec reviewers, team-dev quality gates).

PRINCIPLE: API-first. The platform contract (data model, API surface, business rules) comes before UI. Sections are ordered by platform priority, not visual priority.

CONFIGURATION: Reads jig.config.md for ticket-system (sync target), plans-directory (local save location), prd-sync (optional remote document sync), and the ## Concerns Checklist (concerns to walk through).

---

When to Use

• Starting a new feature or large improvement -- capture requirements before brainstorming approaches
• Documenting a bug fix that touches multiple layers
• Any time you want a structured spec that downstream agents can verify against
• Invoked manually via /prd or prompted by kickoff for features

Do NOT use when: The work is a trivial config change, chore, or single-line fix with obvious scope.

---

Tiers

Two tiers, selected by work type:

What type of work?
  |
  +-- feature / large improvement --> Full PRD (12 sections)
  |
  +-- bug / small improvement / task --> Light PRD (5 sections)

• Full: Features and large improvements. 12 sections covering API, data, logic, UI, scope, and acceptance.
• Light: Bugs and small improvements. 5 sections: problem, behavior, surface area, scope, acceptance.

Auto-suggest the tier from context. Ask the user to confirm.

---

Process

Step 1: Gather Context

Before asking the user anything, do your homework:

1. Read the ticket (if one exists) -- extract the problem statement, any existing requirements. Check jig.config.md for ticket-system to determine where to look.
2. Explore the codebase -- look at relevant entities, services, components, APIs. What exists already?
3. Check recent plans/PRDs -- scan docs/plans/ for related prior work

Then ask 2-3 targeted questions (not a form):

• What tier does this feel like? (suggest one based on context)
• Which layers are affected -- API, data model, business logic, UI? (suggest based on exploration)
• Any existing infrastructure to build on? (reference what you found)

Step 2: Determine Tier & Load Sections

Based on the user's answers and your context gathering:

• Select Full or Light tier
• Identify which sections are relevant vs N/A for this specific work
• Use the section references below (Full PRD Sections or Light PRD Sections)

Step 3: Draft

Produce a complete PRD draft in one pass:

• Known sections: fill from context, codebase exploration, and conversation
• Unknown sections: flag with TBD -- [what needs to be decided]
• N/A sections: mark explicitly with a one-line reason -- never silently omit
• Acceptance checklist: always present, with [ ] items tagged by layer

Draft quality bar: The draft should be good enough that the user is refining and correcting, not writing from scratch. Leverage what you learned in Step 1.

Step 3b: PRD Review Swarm

After producing the draft, invoke the review swarm to scrutinize the requirements before the user refines them.

Automatic dispatch: Run the swarm for all medium-to-large features and improvements. Skip only for clearly trivial work (config change, single-line fix, chore with obvious scope).

INVOKE jig:review using the Skill tool with mode: prd. Pass the PRD document path. The review skill discovers PRD specialists (stage: prd or both), dispatches them in parallel with the full document + section hints + codebase access, scores findings, and returns a unified report.

Present the swarm findings to the user alongside the draft:

"Here's the PRD draft. Before we refine, the review swarm found these concerns:"

{swarm report}

"Let's address these during refinement, or flag any you want to defer."

The user then refines the draft (Step 4) informed by both their own review and the specialist findings.

Step 3c: Concerns Walk-Through

After the swarm findings are presented but before refinement, walk through the ## Concerns Checklist from jig.config.md.

For each concern listed:

• If marked Yes and mapped to a skill -> load that skill for guidance, then capture its implications as new acceptance items
• If marked Yes and mapped to a specialist -> note the specialist's domain; the specialist will validate during review:prd
• If marked Yes and mapped to manual -> add an acceptance item flagging human review
• If marked No or N/A -> record the decision with brief rationale in an "Open Questions" or "Out of Scope" section

Each Yes concern adds scope to the PRD acceptance checklist. The user must explicitly approve added scope.

Work type behavior:

• Features and large improvements: full walk-through
• Bugs and small improvements: only walk through concerns flagged relevant by the swarm or user
• Tasks: skip

If no concerns checklist is configured in jig.config.md, use minimal defaults: error-handling, security, test-strategy.

See framework/CONCERNS_CHECKLIST.md for full configuration documentation.

Step 4: Refine

Walk through the draft with the user:

• Resolve TBD items collaboratively
• Add details the user provides
• Remove sections the user confirms are N/A
• Iterate until the user approves

Do NOT rush this step. The PRD is only as good as the refinement. If the user spots gaps, dig into them.

Step 5: Save

1. Determine the local save path — read plans-directory and filename-format from jig.config.md (defaults: docs/plans/ and {date}-{topic}-{kind}.md). Resolve to e.g. docs/plans/2026-05-27-export-feature-prd.md.
2. Write the PRD to the resolved path.
3. Check prd-sync in jig.config.md — if set (e.g., prd-sync: linear), invoke the configured pack's doc-sync instructions. See the pack's README for the sync method (e.g., packs/linear/README.md → "PRD document sync").
4. Always offer ticket sync — "Want to also sync these requirements to the ticket description?" If yes, push the PRD content to the ticket system configured in jig.config.md (separate from doc sync — ticket is the issue, doc is the standalone artifact).
5. Confirm all save locations to the user.

---

Full PRD Sections (12 sections)

Use for features and large improvements. Not every section applies to every PRD -- mark irrelevant sections as N/A with a brief reason. Sections are ordered by platform priority: API-first, UI last.

1. Overview

Orient any reader in 30 seconds.

• 1-3 sentences: what is being built and why
• Links to context: ticket, walkthrough, designs (when available)
• Audience test: someone outside engineering should understand this paragraph

Good: "A component export feature that lets users build custom export packages, select revisions, configure output settings, and receive the export via email or direct download."

Bad: "We need to implement the mutation with a workflow and a new entity." (That is implementation, not requirements.)

2. Background & Motivation

Establish why this work matters.

• What problem exists today? Who is affected?
• What is the business or user impact of solving it?
• Any prior art, customer requests, or competitive pressure?

Skip if self-evident from the Overview. Keep to 2-4 sentences.

3. API Contract

Define the interface -- this is the platform contract.

For each query, mutation, endpoint, or operation:

• Name and description of the operation
• Input types with field names, types, nullability, defaults
• Return types with field names and types
• Auth/permission requirements (which roles can call this?)
• Error cases with expected error codes and conditions

Format as a checklist for downstream verification:

• [API] createOrder endpoint: accepts CreateOrderInput, returns Order
• [API] Input field items: [OrderItemInput!]! -- required, non-empty array
• [API] Error ORDER_EMPTY_ITEMS thrown when items is empty
• [API] Requires ORDER_CREATE permission or admin role

What good looks like: A backend engineer can implement the endpoint from this section alone without asking clarifying questions about the contract.

4. Data Model

Define new or modified entities, relationships, and schema changes.

For each entity:

• Entity name and purpose
• Fields with name, type, nullability, defaults, constraints
• Relationships (one-to-many, many-to-many, foreign keys)
• Indexes worth calling out (unique constraints, frequently queried fields)
• Migration notes (new table vs ALTER on existing)

Format as a checklist:

• [DATA] Order entity: id, status (enum), userId (FK), settings (JSON), total (decimal)
• [DATA] OrderItem join entity: orderId (FK), productId (FK), quantity (int)
• [DATA] Migration handles existing databases with data

5. Business Logic & Rules

Define validations, state transitions, conditional behavior, and side effects.

Cover:

• Validations -- what inputs are rejected and why?
• State transitions -- if entities have a status/lifecycle, document the state machine
• Conditional behavior -- "if X then Y" rules
• Permissions -- who can do what?
• Side effects -- events published, background jobs initiated, emails sent, webhooks triggered

Format as a checklist:

• [LOGIC] Order transitions: DRAFT -> SUBMITTED -> APPROVED | REJECTED
• [LOGIC] Only items the user has read access to can be added
• [LOGIC] Event order.submitted published on submission
• [LOGIC] Email sent to approver on submission

6. Entry Points & User Flows

Document how users reach this feature and what context they carry in.

Each entry path gets its own subsection:

Path A -- Dashboard "New Order" Button

• User clicks "New Order" on dashboard
• Navigates to order creation page in empty state

Path B -- Product List (Multi-select)

• User selects products via checkboxes
• Opens Actions menu -> "Create Order"
• Navigates to order creation page with selected products pre-populated

What good looks like: A frontend engineer knows every route into the feature and what state/data each path carries.

7. UI States & Layout

Define page structure and every visual state.

Cover:

• Page layout -- regions, panels, sidebars, their relationship
• States -- empty, populated, loading, error, disabled
• Each state: what is visible, what is hidden, what is disabled, what is actionable

8. Component Behavior

Specify interactive behavior for each non-trivial UI component.

For each component cover:

• Trigger -- what initiates interaction
• Behavior -- what happens on interaction
• States -- enabled, disabled, selected, already-added
• Defaults -- what is selected/shown by default

Components to document: modals, forms, dropdowns, pickers, sidebars, drawers, lists with selection, drag-and-drop, toggles.

9. Settings & Configuration

Document every user-configurable option.

For each setting:

• Label -- what the user sees
• Control type -- dropdown, checkbox, radio, text input
• Options -- all available values
• Default -- what is selected when the user has not touched it
• Behavior -- what changes when the setting is toggled

10. Open Questions

Make unresolved decisions visible, not hidden.

Each open question should include:

• The question itself
• Enough context that someone could answer it without asking for more info
• Who might need to weigh in (if known)

Prefix each with TBD for scannability:

• TBD: How are download links handled for unauthenticated users? Needs input from security team.
• TBD: Exact polling UX for progress -- requires backend timing data to inform.

11. Out of Scope

Explicitly define what is NOT included in this work.

• Features deferred to future tickets (with brief reasoning)
• Adjacent features that might seem related but are not part of this effort
• "Do not build" markers for things that appear in designs but are deferred

12. Acceptance Checklist

The enforceable contract. Downstream agents verify every item. See the Acceptance Checklist Format section below for rules.

---

Light PRD Sections (5 sections)

Use for bugs, small improvements, or tasks. Keep it concise -- a light PRD should take minutes, not an hour.

1. Problem Statement

What is broken or suboptimal, and who is affected?

• 2-3 sentences max
• Link to: ticket, error tracker, screenshot, reproduction URL
• Be specific: "Clicking export with 0 items returns a 500" not "export is broken"

2. Current vs Expected Behavior

Make the gap between now and done crystal clear.

Current Behavior

What happens now. For bugs: reproduction steps. For improvements: current limitation.

Expected Behavior

What should happen instead. Concrete and testable.

Keep it concrete -- "clicking X shows Y" not "the experience is degraded."

3. Affected Surface Area

Scope the change so implementers know where to look and agents know where to verify.

• Which layers: API, database, business logic, UI
• Existing files, entities, services, components involved
• Note if the fix is isolated or has cross-cutting impact

4. Scope Boundaries

Prevent scope creep on what should be a focused change.

• Out of scope / do not fix in this PR
• Open questions (TBD) if any
• Keep brief -- a few bullets max

5. Acceptance Checklist

The enforceable contract -- same rules as the full PRD. See the Acceptance Checklist Format section below.

---

Acceptance Checklist Format

The acceptance checklist is the enforceable contract. Every item must be:

Property	Rule
Atomic	One verifiable behavior per checkbox
Testable	An agent can determine pass/fail by reading code or running a test
Layer-tagged	Prefixed with [API], [DATA], [LOGIC], or [UI]
Concrete	"Export button disabled when list empty" not "UI works correctly"

Example:

API

• [API] createOrder mutation accepts items and settings input
• [API] Returns Order with id, status, total
• [API] Throws ORDER_EMPTY_ITEMS error when items is empty

Data

• [DATA] Order entity created with status, userId, settings columns
• [DATA] Migration runs cleanly on empty and populated databases

Logic

• [LOGIC] Background job initiated on submission
• [LOGIC] Only active items included when activeOnly: true

UI

• [UI] Submit button disabled when item list is empty
• [UI] Toast shown after submission

---

Downstream Agent Consumption

When a PRD exists, implementation plans should reference it:

PRD: docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD--prd.md

This pointer tells downstream agents (spec reviewers, team-dev quality gates) where to find the acceptance checklist. They load the PRD, extract the [ ] items, and verify each one against the implementation with file:line references.

---

Integration with kickoff

This skill sits inside the DISCOVER stage in the kickoff pipeline as an optional requirements-capture tool:

CLASSIFY -> DISCOVER -> (PRD optional) -> PLAN -> EXECUTE -> REVIEW -> SHIP -> LEARN

• Features: kickoff prompts "Capture requirements with /prd?"
• Large improvements: prompted
• Bugs/tasks: skipped (invoke manually if needed)

The PRD becomes the input to plan's TRANSPOSE step. plan reads the PRD's acceptance checklist and distills it into a build sequence. The PRD defines what the requirements are; plan decides how to satisfy them.

---

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Fix
Starting with UI sections	Lead with API contract and data model -- platform first
Vague acceptance items	Every [ ] must be testable. "Works correctly" is never acceptable
Skipping N/A sections silently	Mark them explicitly -- the absence of a section is a decision worth documenting
Writing implementation details	The PRD captures what, not how. Save the how for brainstorming and planning
Forgetting open questions	Flag unknowns with TBD -- unresolved questions are better visible than hidden
Overly long PRDs for small work	Use the Light tier. Five focused sections beat twelve half-empty ones
Not exploring the codebase first	The draft quality depends on context. Read the code before writing the spec
Hardcoding ticket system references	Read ticket-system from jig.config.md -- do not assume any particular tool
Acceptance items without layer tags	Every [ ] must be prefixed with [API], [DATA], [LOGIC], or [UI]
"The bug is fixed" as acceptance item	Be specific: what behavior changed? What inputs produce what outputs?

---

Integration

Called by:

• kickoff during the REQUIREMENTS stage (between DISCOVER and BRAINSTORM)

Terminal state:

• Return to kickoff, which proceeds to BRAINSTORM

Related skills:

• brainstorm -- consumes the PRD as input to design exploration
• plan -- references the PRD in the plan header for spec reviewers
• kickoff -- orchestrates the full pipeline including this skill

---

Quick Reference

Element	Rule
Full tier	12 sections, features and large improvements
Light tier	5 sections, bugs and small improvements
Save location	{plans-directory}/{filename-format} (default: docs/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-prd.md)
Remote sync	Optional via prd-sync in jig.config.md (pack-driven)
Acceptance items	Atomic, testable, layer-tagged, concrete
Layer tags	[API], [DATA], [LOGIC], [UI]
API-first	Platform contract before UI in section order
Ticket sync	Read ticket-system from jig.config.md