本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

product-skills

Use when coordinating product work across the 12 bundled product sub-skills (RICE, OKRs, UX research, design tokens, competitive teardown, analytics, experiments, discovery, roadmaps, spec-to-repo, landing pages, SaaS scaffolding) or the 4 standalone product-team plugins (user stories, Apple HIG, code-to-PRD, research summarizer). Triggers on 'help me prioritize', 'plan a product experiment', 'we ship features nobody uses', 'run the discovery loop', 'is our OST sound'. Forks context to route to one sub-skill via a deterministic signal router and returns a digest; can also drive a continuous-discovery loop (Torres cadence tracker + OST linter as machine gates) or a full goal→plan→execute→verify→close run through the repo-wide agent-harness. Distinct from project-management (how to deliver vs what to build), marketing/landing (from-scratch pages), and engineering/agent-harness (the generic loop engine this orchestrator plugs into).

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(9)

  • SKILL.md10.2 KB
  • assets/sample_discovery_log.json965 B
  • assets/sample_ost.json984 B
  • references/ai_product_evals.md3.6 KB
  • references/continuous_discovery_canon.md3.9 KB
  • references/product_operating_model.md3.9 KB
  • scripts/discovery_cadence_tracker.py7.8 KB
  • scripts/ost_linter.py7.1 KB
  • scripts/product_goal_router.py8.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Product Team — Domain Orchestrator & Discovery Loop

This orchestrator does two jobs. Routing: fork context, classify a product inquiry with scripts/product_goal_router.py across all 16 product-team lanes (12 bundled + 4 standalone plugins), run exactly one, return a digest. Looping: run product work as bounded agentic loops with machine-checkable gates — the continuous-discovery loop (weekly cadence scored by discovery_cadence_tracker.py, tree structure enforced by ost_linter.py) and goal-scale runs through the repo-wide agent-harness.

When to invoke

SymptomSub-skill
"Prioritize features / RICE / PRD"product-manager-toolkit
"OKRs, strategy cascade"product-strategist
"Personas, usability, research synthesis"ux-researcher-designer
"Design tokens, WCAG contrast"ui-design-system
"Competitor matrix, teardown"competitive-teardown
"Retention, cohorts, funnels, KPIs"product-analytics
"A/B test, sample size, hypothesis"experiment-designer
"Discovery, assumptions, opportunity trees"product-discovery
"Roadmap comms, release notes, changelog"roadmap-communicator
"Spec → runnable repo"spec-to-repo
"Landing page (Next.js/Tailwind)"landing-page-generator
"SaaS boilerplate"saas-scaffolder
"User stories, sprint capacity"agile-product-owner (standalone)
"Apple HIG audit"apple-hig-expert (standalone)
"PRD from an existing codebase"code-to-prd (standalone)
"Summarize papers/articles"research-summarizer (standalone)

Routing logic (deterministic)

python3 scripts/product_goal_router.py --text "<the goal>" --output json

Exit 0 → route_to names the skill (with skill_path, including the standalone plugins): load its SKILL.md and follow its workflow. Exit 2 → ask ONE clarifying question naming the listed candidates, with a recommended answer. Exit 3 → no signal: ask the user to restate the goal with the deliverable named. Never guess silently; never silently chain — digest first, confirm, then chain.

The discovery loop (the domain's recurring agentic loop)

Modern discovery is a weekly habit, not a project phase (Torres). Run it as a bounded loop with two machine gates:

  1. Observe — maintain discovery_log.json (interviews, assumption tests; shape in assets/sample_discovery_log.json) and score the cadence:
    python3 scripts/discovery_cadence_tracker.py --input discovery_log.json
    
    Refuses on < 2 interviews (exit 5) — there is no cadence to measure yet. Output: health 0–100, verdict HEALTHY/AT-RISK/DORMANT, named gaps, and next_loop_action.
  2. Choose — the tracker's next_loop_action IS the choice: book the touchpoint, re-anchor the guide on the outcome, or test the top untested assumption (route to product-discovery's assumption_mapper for prioritization).
  3. Act — run the interview / assumption test with the routed sub-skill's tools.
  4. Verify — keep the tree structurally sound before it may drive a roadmap:
    python3 scripts/ost_linter.py --input ost.json    # exit 2 = NEEDS-REWORK, fix before citing the tree
    
    Rules: one measurable outcome root (O1), opportunities are needs not features (O2), targeted opportunities compare ≥ 2 solutions (O3), every solution has an assumption test (O4), no orphan solutions (O5 — the feature-factory tell).
  5. Record / Repeat-or-stop — update the log, keep the weekly streak alive. Stop states: HEALTHY + validated assumption → graduate to experiment-designer (build the A/B gate) or product-manager-toolkit (PRD); DORMANT for 4+ weeks → escalate to the product lead by name — do not quietly let discovery die.

For build-scale goals ("turn this validated spec into a repo and verify it"), compile through the repo-wide harness instead:

python3 engineering/agent-harness/skills/agent-harness/scripts/goal_compiler.py \
  --goal "<goal>" --manifest engineering/agent-harness/skills/agent-harness/assets/harnesses/product-team.json \
  --out .agent-harness/plan.json

The domain's three strongest close-out gates plug in as task verifications: ../spec-to-repo/scripts/validate_project.py (exit 0), code-to-prd's golden expected_outputs/, and research-summarizer's citation-count check.

Hard rules

  1. Evidence before conviction: no roadmap item cites the OST unless ost_linter.py exits 0; no insight is asserted from a single participant (anecdote, not insight).
  2. Outcome-first: every loop hangs from one measurable outcome — the linter's O1 rule is the intake gate.
  3. Experiments are gated by math: sample size from ../experiment-designer/scripts/sample_size_calculator.py, never gut feel; report the MDE with the verdict.
  4. Prioritization shows its framework: RICE for steady-state, WSJF/cost-of-delay when time sensitivity dominates, opportunity scoring for underserved needs — name which and why (see references/product_operating_model.md).
  5. AI features ship with evals: a golden set + rubric is the PRD's quality contract for probabilistic features (references/ai_product_evals.md).
  6. Never modify a gate you are judged by; exhausted budgets escalate to a named human, never report as success.

Forcing-question library (grill-with-docs pattern)

One per turn, recommended answer, canon citation. Never run a sub-skill or start a loop until the lane-defining decision is locked:

  • DISCOVERY lane: "What is the single outcome this discovery serves, stated with a number? Recommended: write it as the OST root first — opportunities without an outcome are a feature factory. Canon: Torres, Continuous Discovery Habits; opportunity solution trees (producttalk.org)."
  • PRIORITIZE lane: "Does time sensitivity change this ranking — would delaying any item a quarter erode its value? Recommended: if yes, run WSJF/cost-of-delay alongside RICE and compare ranks; flag items whose rank flips on a one-step estimate change. Canon: Reinertsen, Principles of Product Development Flow; SAFe WSJF false-precision critique."
  • EXPERIMENT lane: "What baseline rate and MDE justify this test's runtime? Recommended: compute n first; if you can't reach it in 4 weeks, test a bigger lever. Canon: statistical power analysis (experiment-designer)."
  • ANALYTICS lane: "Is your North Star a leading indicator of value exchange, or revenue/vanity? Recommended: leading value metric with an input tree. Canon: Amplitude, The North Star Playbook."
  • STRATEGY lane: "Are these OKRs outcomes or shipping lists? Recommended: outcomes — output OKRs are the #1 operating-model failure. Canon: Cagan, Transformed (SVPG, 2024)."
  • BUILD lanes (spec-to-repo / saas-scaffolder): "Which validated assumption says this should be built at all? Recommended: link the OST test that survived; building is the most expensive way to test an idea. Canon: Torres; Bland, Testing Business Ideas."

Assumptions

  1. The user owns (or advises the owner of) the product decision.
  2. Discovery data lives in the workspace as JSON logs — the loop is file-backed and resumable; every tool ships --sample so the shape is visible first.
  3. The four standalone plugins are installed alongside the bundle (the router still routes to them by path if not).

Non-goals

  • Not the delivery loop — sprint/flow/Jira work routes to project-management.
  • Not the generic loop engine — that is engineering/agent-harness; this orchestrator is the product-domain adapter (router + discovery gates).
  • Not campaign marketing — marketing/landing builds from-scratch marketing pages; landing-page-generator here scaffolds product Next.js/TSX pages.

Output artifacts

ModeArtifact
RouteSub-skill's own artifact + ≤ 200-word digest with one canon-cited challenge
Discovery loopdiscovery_log.json + cadence report + linted ost.json
Harness run.agent-harness/plan.json + state.json + close handoff

Anti-patterns (do not)

  • ❌ Run all 16 lanes "to be thorough" — route to one, digest, chain on confirmation
  • ❌ Cite an OST that fails the linter, or promote a single-participant anecdote to insight
  • ❌ Ship an AI feature whose PRD has no eval (golden set + rubric)
  • ❌ Let the discovery streak die silently — DORMANT escalates by name
  • ❌ Treat RICE as the only prioritization lens when deadlines dominate

References

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Accessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

When the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

When the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

Adversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

aeo

無料

Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

Mint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

alirezarezvani/claude-skills2.8万2026年8月30日 更新

alirezarezvani のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する