一键导入
to-prd
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.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
菜单
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.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Use when the user wants to drive a raw feature or bug prompt all the way to a reviewed, merge-ready PR/MR in one hands-off, autonomous run with only two human touchpoints (requirements grilling, final merge approval), or invokes /forge. Stack- and tracker-agnostic (GitHub or GitLab); reads per-repo settings from .yaah/config.yml (written by /setup-yaah); each run works in its own git worktree off the latest default branch, so many runs go in parallel without colliding; supports a parallel branch-per-issue build mode. The full phase chain and its mechanics live in the body and PLAYBOOK.md, not here.
One-time interactive setup for the yaah harness / forge pipeline. Detects the repo's stack, default branch, and issue tracker, offers to install the token-efficiency tools (graphify, rtk, caveman), asks the user to confirm or adjust, then writes .yaah/config.yml that forge reads. Use when the user first installs yaah, runs /setup-yaah, or when forge reports a missing config.
Use for forge's review — ONE reviewer that covers everything in a single read-only pass over a branch/PR/MR diff. Returns a spec-compliance verdict (missing/extra/misunderstood vs the requirements, plus correctness and security), a code-quality verdict, and a ⚠️ can't-verify-from-diff verdict. Runs in two depth modes: PER-ROUND (focused, cheap — every review round) and FINAL (adds a deep, ambitious maintainability audit — the once-per-run gate on the most-capable model).
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, failing check, or unexpected behavior, BEFORE proposing fixes. A four-phase root-cause discipline (investigate → pattern → hypothesis → implement) that replaces guess-and-retry. Bundles root-cause-tracing, defense-in-depth, condition-based-waiting, and find-polluter.sh.
| 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. |
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 (cli: gh or glab) and triage label vocabulary (issue_label) come from .yaah/config.yml at the repo root — read it if they weren't already provided, and run /setup-yaah if that file is missing.
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 seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can.
Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
ready-for-agent triage label - no need for additional triage.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.