{ "schemaVersion": "1.0", "item": { "slug": "afrexai-product-manager", "name": "Product Management OS", "source": "tencent", "type": "skill", "category": "开发工具", "sourceUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/1kalin/afrexai-product-manager", "canonicalUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/1kalin/afrexai-product-manager", "targetPlatform": "OpenClaw" }, "install": { "downloadMode": "redirect", "downloadUrl": "/downloads/afrexai-product-manager", "sourceDownloadUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=afrexai-product-manager", "sourcePlatform": "tencent", "targetPlatform": "OpenClaw", "installMethod": "Manual import", "extraction": "Extract archive", "prerequisites": [ "OpenClaw" ], "packageFormat": "ZIP package", "includedAssets": [ "README.md", "SKILL.md" ], "primaryDoc": "SKILL.md", "quickSetup": [ "Download the package from Yavira.", "Extract the archive and review SKILL.md first.", "Import or place the package into your OpenClaw setup." ], "agentAssist": { "summary": "Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.", "steps": [ "Download the package from Yavira.", "Extract it into a folder your agent can access.", "Paste one of the prompts below and point your agent at the extracted folder." ], "prompts": [ { "label": "New install", "body": "I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Then review README.md for any prerequisites, environment setup, or post-install checks. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete." }, { "label": "Upgrade existing", "body": "I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Then review README.md for any prerequisites, environment setup, or post-install checks. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run." } ] }, "sourceHealth": { "source": "tencent", "status": "healthy", "reason": "direct_download_ok", "recommendedAction": "download", "checkedAt": "2026-04-30T16:55:25.780Z", "expiresAt": "2026-05-07T16:55:25.780Z", "httpStatus": 200, "finalUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=network", "contentType": "application/zip", "probeMethod": "head", "details": { "probeUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=network", "contentDisposition": "attachment; filename=\"network-1.0.0.zip\"", "redirectLocation": null, "bodySnippet": null }, "scope": "source", "summary": "Source download looks usable.", "detail": "Yavira can redirect you to the upstream package for this source.", "primaryActionLabel": "Download for OpenClaw", "primaryActionHref": "/downloads/afrexai-product-manager" }, "validation": { "installChecklist": [ "Use the Yavira download entry.", "Review SKILL.md after the package is downloaded.", "Confirm the extracted package contains the expected setup assets." ], "postInstallChecks": [ "Confirm the extracted package includes the expected docs or setup files.", "Validate the skill or prompts are available in your target agent workspace.", "Capture any manual follow-up steps the agent could not complete." ] }, "downloadPageUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/downloads/afrexai-product-manager", "agentPageUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent", "manifestUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent.json", "briefUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent.md" }, "agentAssist": { "summary": "Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.", "steps": [ "Download the package from Yavira.", "Extract it into a folder your agent can access.", "Paste one of the prompts below and point your agent at the extracted folder." ], "prompts": [ { "label": "New install", "body": "I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Then review README.md for any prerequisites, environment setup, or post-install checks. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete." }, { "label": "Upgrade existing", "body": "I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Then review README.md for any prerequisites, environment setup, or post-install checks. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run." } ] }, "documentation": { "source": "clawhub", "primaryDoc": "SKILL.md", "sections": [ { "title": "Product Management Operating System", "body": "You are a world-class product management system. Follow this methodology for every product decision." }, { "title": "Quick Health Check", "body": "When asked to evaluate PM practice, score across 8 dimensions (1-10):\n\nDiscovery cadence (talking to users weekly?)\nPrioritization rigor (framework-driven or gut?)\nRoadmap clarity (outcomes, not output lists?)\nSpec quality (unambiguous acceptance criteria?)\nMetrics discipline (north star + leading indicators?)\nCross-functional trust (eng/design respect?)\nStakeholder management (surprises = 0?)\nShipping cadence (regular releases?)\n\nScore /80. Below 50 = urgent intervention needed." }, { "title": "Strategy Brief YAML", "body": "product_strategy:\n vision: \"[What the world looks like if we succeed]\"\n mission: \"[How we get there — our unique approach]\"\n target_customer: \"[Primary persona with specifics]\"\n problem: \"[The #1 problem we solve, validated]\"\n differentiation: \"[Why us, not alternatives — max 3 reasons]\"\n business_model: \"[How we make money — be specific]\"\n success_metric: \"[North star metric + target + timeframe]\"\n moat_type: \"[network_effects | switching_costs | data | brand | scale | IP]\"\n anti_goals:\n - \"[What we explicitly will NOT do]\"\n - \"[Market we won't serve]\"\n - \"[Feature we won't build]\"\n key_assumptions:\n - assumption: \"[Belief we're betting on]\"\n validation_method: \"[How we'll prove/disprove]\"\n status: \"unvalidated | testing | validated | invalidated\"\n competitive_landscape:\n direct: [\"[Competitor 1]\", \"[Competitor 2]\"]\n indirect: [\"[Alternative 1]\", \"[Alternative 2]\"]\n do_nothing: \"[What happens if customer does nothing]\"" }, { "title": "Strategy Validation Checklist", "body": "Can you explain the strategy in 30 seconds to a stranger?\n Does the target customer segment have budget AND urgency?\n Is the differentiation defensible in 18 months?\n Can you name 5 customers who'd pay today?\n Is the business model proven in adjacent markets?\n Are anti-goals clear enough to say no to real opportunities?" }, { "title": "Discovery Cadence Rules", "body": "Minimum: 3 user conversations per week (not internal stakeholders)\nMix: 40% current users, 30% churned/lost deals, 30% prospects\nFormat: 30-min calls, open-ended questions, no selling\nArtifact: Interview summary within 24 hours" }, { "title": "Interview Script Template", "body": "Opening (2 min):\n\"Tell me about your role and what a typical [week/day] looks like.\"\n\nContext (5 min):\n\"Walk me through the last time you [relevant task]. What happened?\"\n\"What tools/processes do you use for [area]?\"\n\nProblem Exploration (10 min):\n\"What's the hardest part about [area]?\"\n\"Why is that hard?\" (ask 5 times — 5 Whys)\n\"What have you tried to solve this?\"\n\"What happened when you tried [solution]?\"\n\nImpact (5 min):\n\"How much time/money does this cost you?\"\n\"If this was solved tomorrow, what would change?\"\n\"Who else cares about this problem?\"\n\nWrap (3 min):\n\"Is there anything I should have asked but didn't?\"\n\"Can you introduce me to anyone else who faces this?\"" }, { "title": "Interview Synthesis Template", "body": "interview:\n date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n participant: \"[Name, Role, Company]\"\n segment: \"[ICP segment]\"\n key_quotes:\n - quote: \"[Exact words]\"\n context: \"[What prompted this]\"\n theme: \"[pain | workflow | wishlist | competitor]\"\n jobs_to_be_done:\n - job: \"[When I [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [outcome]]\"\n frequency: \"[daily | weekly | monthly | quarterly]\"\n current_solution: \"[How they do it today]\"\n satisfaction: \"[1-5 scale]\"\n pain_points:\n - pain: \"[Description]\"\n severity: \"[1-5]\"\n frequency: \"[1-5]\"\n workaround: \"[What they do instead]\"\n insights:\n - \"[Non-obvious finding]\"\n follow_up: \"[Next step with this person]\"" }, { "title": "Pattern Recognition", "body": "After 5+ interviews, synthesize:\n\nUniversal pains (80%+ mention) → must-solve\nCommon pains (40-80%) → should-solve\nNiche pains (<40%) → segment-specific, defer unless high-value\nContradictions → different segments, investigate" }, { "title": "Validation Methods (by confidence needed)", "body": "MethodConfidenceTimeCostBest ForInterviewsMedium1 weekFreeProblem validationSurveys (100+)Medium-High2 weeks$0-500Quantifying demandFake door testHigh3 days$200-1K adsFeature demandConcierge MVPVery High2-4 weeksTime onlySolution validationWizard of OzVery High1-2 weeksTime onlyUX validationLanding page + waitlistHigh1 week$500 adsMarket demandPrototype testingHigh1-2 weeksTime onlyUsabilityBeta / early accessHighest4-8 weeksDev costFull validation\n\nRule: Never skip straight to building. Validate problem → validate solution → validate willingness to pay → build." }, { "title": "RICE+ Framework (Enhanced)", "body": "Score every feature candidate:\n\nfeature_evaluation:\n name: \"[Feature name]\"\n reach:\n users_affected: \"[Number in next quarter]\"\n segment: \"[Which users — all, power, new, churning?]\"\n score: \"[1-10]\"\n impact:\n on_north_star: \"[Direct | Indirect | None]\"\n magnitude: \"[3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal]\"\n confidence: \"[High=1.0 | Medium=0.5 | Low=0.25]\"\n effort:\n eng_weeks: \"[Estimate]\"\n design_weeks: \"[Estimate]\"\n dependencies: [\"[Other teams/features needed]\"]\n risk: \"[Low | Medium | High — technical uncertainty]\"\n score: \"[1-10, where 10=trivial, 1=massive]\"\n strategic_fit:\n advances_north_star: \"[yes/no]\"\n moat_contribution: \"[yes/no]\"\n retention_vs_acquisition: \"[retention | acquisition | both]\"\n reversibility: \"[easy | hard — can we undo this?]\"\n score: \"[1-5]\"\n rice_plus_score: \"[reach × impact × confidence × strategic_fit / effort]\"" }, { "title": "Prioritization Decision Matrix", "body": "SignalActionHigh RICE + retention impactShip ASAP — protect existing revenueHigh RICE + acquisition impactShip next — grow pipelineLow RICE + high strategic valueTimebox an experiment firstHigh effort + uncertain impactRun a validation experimentStakeholder request + low RICESay no with data. Offer alternativeCustomer request + high churn riskInvestigate root cause, not just featureCompetitor shipped itEvaluate independently — don't react\"Easy win\" + low impactResist. Small things compound into distraction" }, { "title": "Saying No Framework", "body": "Acknowledge: \"I understand why this matters to you.\"\nData: \"Here's what our prioritization shows...\"\nTrade-off: \"To do this, we'd need to drop [X]. Here's the impact.\"\nAlternative: \"What if we [lighter solution] instead?\"\nRevisit: \"Let's re-evaluate in [timeframe] with [data].\"" }, { "title": "Roadmap Structure (Now/Next/Later)", "body": "roadmap:\n now: # This quarter — committed, in progress\n theme: \"[Outcome we're driving]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Initiative]\"\n outcome: \"[Measurable result]\"\n status: \"in_progress | shipping_soon\"\n confidence: \"high\" # 80%+\n \n next: # Next quarter — planned, not committed\n theme: \"[Outcome we're targeting]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Initiative]\"\n outcome: \"[Expected result]\"\n status: \"scoping | validated\"\n confidence: \"medium\" # 50-80%\n \n later: # 2+ quarters — exploring, flexible\n theme: \"[Strategic direction]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Bet]\"\n hypothesis: \"[What we believe]\"\n status: \"researching | idea\"\n confidence: \"low\" # <50%" }, { "title": "Roadmap Communication Rules", "body": "Never promise dates for \"next\" and \"later\" — use time horizons\nOutcomes, not features — \"Reduce time-to-value by 40%\" not \"Build onboarding wizard\"\nUpdate monthly — stale roadmaps are worse than no roadmap\nVersion it — stakeholders should see what changed and why\nOne page max — if it needs a scroll, it's too detailed\nConfidence levels are mandatory — underpromise, overdeliver" }, { "title": "Roadmap Anti-Patterns", "body": "❌ Feature factory (shipping without measuring)\n❌ Date-driven (working backward from arbitrary deadlines)\n❌ Stakeholder-driven (loudest voice wins)\n❌ Competitor-driven (copying instead of differentiating)\n❌ Technology-driven (building cool things nobody asked for)" }, { "title": "One-Pager (for every initiative)", "body": "one_pager:\n title: \"[Initiative name]\"\n author: \"[PM name]\"\n date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n status: \"draft | review | approved\"\n \n problem:\n statement: \"[1-2 sentences]\"\n evidence: \"[User quotes, data, support tickets]\"\n who_affected: \"[Persona + count]\"\n impact_of_not_solving: \"[What happens if we don't build this]\"\n \n solution:\n summary: \"[1-2 sentences]\"\n key_user_flows:\n - \"[Step 1 → Step 2 → Outcome]\"\n out_of_scope:\n - \"[Explicitly excluded]\"\n \n success_metrics:\n primary: \"[Metric + target + timeframe]\"\n secondary: [\"[Supporting metric]\"]\n guardrail: \"[Metric that must NOT decrease]\"\n \n risks:\n - risk: \"[What could go wrong]\"\n likelihood: \"[low | medium | high]\"\n mitigation: \"[What we'll do about it]\"\n \n effort:\n t_shirt: \"[XS | S | M | L | XL]\"\n team: [\"[Eng]\", \"[Design]\", \"[Data]\"]\n dependencies: [\"[Other teams/services]\"]\n \n timeline:\n target_ship: \"[Quarter]\"\n milestones:\n - \"[Milestone 1 — date]\"" }, { "title": "User Story Format", "body": "As a [specific persona],\nWhen I [trigger/situation],\nI want to [action/capability],\nSo that [measurable outcome].\n\nAcceptance Criteria:\n- GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]\n- GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]\n- Edge case: [scenario] → [expected behavior]\n\nNOT in scope:\n- [Explicit exclusion]\n\nDefinition of Done:\n- [ ] All AC pass in QA\n- [ ] Analytics events fire correctly\n- [ ] Error states handled gracefully\n- [ ] Mobile/responsive verified\n- [ ] Performance: [specific threshold]\n- [ ] Accessibility: [specific standard]" }, { "title": "Spec Quality Checklist (score /20)", "body": "Problem is validated with user evidence (not assumed) — 3pts\n Success metric is specific and measurable — 3pts\n Out of scope is explicit — 2pts\n Edge cases listed — 2pts\n Error states defined — 2pts\n Mobile/responsive considered — 1pt\n Accessibility requirements stated — 1pt\n Performance requirements stated — 1pt\n Analytics requirements listed — 1pt\n Dependencies identified — 1pt\n Risks and mitigations listed — 1pt\n Design mockups linked — 1pt\n Engineering reviewed and estimated — 1pt\n\nBelow 14/20 → spec is not ready for development." }, { "title": "Sprint Planning Rules", "body": "Capacity: Never plan above 70% of theoretical capacity\nBuffer: 20% for bugs/incidents, 10% for exploration\nStories: Break to 1-3 day chunks max — anything bigger is underspecified\nDependencies: Surface in planning, not mid-sprint\nDemo: Every sprint ends with a demo — no exceptions" }, { "title": "Daily Decisions (PM Calendar)", "body": "Time BlockActivityFrequency30 minStandup + unblockDaily60 minUser conversations3x/week60 minAnalytics reviewDaily30 minRoadmap/backlog grooming2x/week60 minStakeholder updatesWeekly90 minDeep work (specs, strategy)Daily30 minTeam 1:1sWeekly per direct" }, { "title": "Launch Checklist", "body": "Success metrics baseline captured\n Feature flag configured\n Rollout plan: % ramp + timeline\n Rollback plan documented\n Support team briefed\n Help docs / changelog updated\n Internal announcement sent\n Analytics verified in staging\n Load/performance tested if applicable\n Legal/compliance reviewed if applicable" }, { "title": "Post-Launch Review (Week 2)", "body": "post_launch:\n feature: \"[Name]\"\n ship_date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n metrics:\n primary:\n target: \"[What we aimed for]\"\n actual: \"[What happened]\"\n verdict: \"hit | miss | too_early\"\n secondary:\n - metric: \"[Name]\"\n result: \"[Value]\"\n guardrail:\n - metric: \"[Name]\"\n status: \"healthy | degraded\"\n user_feedback:\n positive: [\"[Theme]\"]\n negative: [\"[Theme]\"]\n surprising: [\"[Unexpected finding]\"]\n decisions:\n - \"[Keep | Iterate | Kill | Expand]\"\n learnings:\n - \"[What we'd do differently]\"" }, { "title": "North Star Framework", "body": "metrics:\n north_star:\n metric: \"[Single metric that captures core value delivery]\"\n target: \"[Specific number + timeframe]\"\n leading_indicators:\n - name: \"[Metric]\"\n target: \"[Value]\"\n owner: \"[Team]\"\n update_frequency: \"daily | weekly\"\n - name: \"[Metric]\"\n target: \"[Value]\"\n owner: \"[Team]\"\n guardrails:\n - name: \"[Metric that must NOT decrease]\"\n threshold: \"[Alert if below X]\"\n input_metrics:\n breadth: \"[How many users engage]\"\n depth: \"[How much they engage]\"\n frequency: \"[How often they engage]\"\n efficiency: \"[How fast they get value]\"" }, { "title": "North Star by Business Type", "body": "BusinessNorth StarLeading IndicatorsSaaS B2BWeekly Active TeamsActivation rate, Feature adoption, NRRSaaS B2CDaily Active UsersSignup-to-active, Session frequency, D7 retentionMarketplaceTransactions/weekListings, Buyer visits, Conversion rateE-commerceRevenue per visitorAOV, Conversion rate, Repeat rateContent/MediaEngaged reading timeArticles read, Return rate, Share rateAPI/PlatformAPI calls/monthIntegrations built, Developer signups" }, { "title": "Metrics Review Cadence", "body": "FrequencyWhatWhoActionDailyNorth star + leading indicatorsPMSpot anomaliesWeeklyFeature metrics + funnelPM + Eng + DesignAdjust tacticsMonthlyBusiness metrics + cohortsPM + LeadershipStrategic decisionsQuarterlyNorth star trajectory + roadmapAll stakeholdersRe-prioritize" }, { "title": "Cohort Analysis Template", "body": "Track every cohort (signup week/month):\n\nActivation: % who complete setup within 7 days\nEngagement: Actions per active user in Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12\nRetention: % still active at Day 7, 14, 30, 60, 90\nRevenue: ARPU at Month 1, 3, 6, 12\nExpansion: % who upgrade within 90 days\n\nHealthy SaaS benchmarks:\n\nD7 retention: >60%\nD30 retention: >40%\nD90 retention: >25%\nActivation rate: >40%\nTime to value: <5 minutes for self-serve" }, { "title": "Stakeholder Map", "body": "stakeholders:\n - name: \"[Person]\"\n role: \"[Title]\"\n influence: \"[high | medium | low]\"\n interest: \"[high | medium | low]\"\n strategy: \"[manage_closely | keep_satisfied | keep_informed | monitor]\"\n communication:\n frequency: \"[weekly | biweekly | monthly]\"\n format: \"[1:1 | email | slack | dashboard]\"\n concerns: [\"[What they care about]\"]\n wins: [\"[What makes them look good]\"]" }, { "title": "Update Templates", "body": "Weekly Status (for \"manage closely\" stakeholders):\n\n📊 Product Update — Week of [date]\n\n✅ Shipped: [Feature] — [1-line impact]\n🔨 In Progress: [Feature] — [% done, ETA]\n🚫 Blocked: [Issue] — [What we need]\n📈 Metrics: [North star] = [value] ([trend])\n🔜 Next Week: [Priority 1], [Priority 2]\n\nQuarterly Business Review:\n\nResults vs targets (with charts)\nKey wins + learnings\nWhat we learned from users\nNext quarter priorities + rationale\nResource asks (if any)\nOpen discussion" }, { "title": "Activation Framework", "body": "activation:\n aha_moment: \"[The moment user gets core value]\"\n critical_path:\n - step: \"[Action 1]\"\n target_completion: \"[% and time]\"\n drop_off_fix: \"[If users bail here, do X]\"\n - step: \"[Action 2]\"\n target_completion: \"[%]\"\n drop_off_fix: \"[Fix]\"\n time_to_value:\n target: \"[Minutes/hours to aha moment]\"\n current: \"[Actual measurement]\"\n onboarding_type: \"[self-serve | guided | hybrid | white-glove]\"\n \n triggers:\n activation_nudge:\n condition: \"User signed up but hasn't [action] in 24h\"\n action: \"Email with [specific help]\"\n at_risk:\n condition: \"Active user goes silent for 7 days\"\n action: \"[Re-engagement sequence]\"" }, { "title": "Viral Loop Design", "body": "Natural sharing: user gets value → wants to share → recipient gets value → signs up\nCollaboration hook: product is better with teammates\nContent creation: user creates something shareable (reports, dashboards, designs)\nIntegration: connects to tools others see\nK-factor target: >0.5 (each user brings 0.5 new users)" }, { "title": "Pricing & Packaging Principles", "body": "Free tier: enough value to activate, limited enough to upgrade\nUpgrade trigger: aligned with value delivery (not arbitrary limits)\nPricing metric: scales with value received (seats, usage, revenue)\nAnnual discount: 15-20% (improves retention + cash flow)\nEnterprise: custom pricing at >$50K ACV" }, { "title": "Working with Engineering", "body": "Context, not tickets: Explain the why — let eng figure out the how\nTrade-off conversations: \"If we cut X, can we ship by Y?\"\nTech debt budget: Protect 15-20% of capacity for tech debt\nEstimation trust: Accept estimates, negotiate scope\nOn-call respect: If eng is firefighting, roadmap waits" }, { "title": "Working with Design", "body": "Co-discovery: Research together, don't hand off requirements\nCritique framework: \"What problem does this solve?\" not \"I don't like it\"\nDesign reviews: With users in the room (not just stakeholders)\nDesign system: Support and enforce it — speeds everyone up" }, { "title": "Working with Sales", "body": "Win/loss reviews: Monthly, with recording consent\nCompetitive intel sharing: Real-time channel for field insights\nFeature request triage: Sales submits, PM scores, both discuss\n\"Not on roadmap\" script: \"We hear you. Here's what we're doing instead and why.\"\nCustom deals: Never say yes without PM review of scope" }, { "title": "Working with Customer Success", "body": "NPS/CSAT review: Monthly with CS, quarterly trends\nChurn analysis: PM owns understanding, CS owns save plays\nFeature adoption data: CS flags underused features\nVoice of customer pipeline: CS → PM structured feedback channel" }, { "title": "Opportunity Sizing", "body": "TAM: [Total addressable market — everyone who could use this]\nSAM: [Serviceable addressable — our segment of TAM]\nSOM: [Serviceable obtainable — realistic capture in 3 years]\n\nBottom-up validation:\n[Number of target companies] × [seats per company] × [price per seat] × [conversion rate] = [Revenue estimate]" }, { "title": "Build vs Buy vs Partner Decision", "body": "FactorBuildBuy/IntegratePartnerCore to value prop✅ Build❌❌Commoditized❌✅ Buy❌Adjacent capability❌❌✅ PartnerSpeed critical❌ (slow)✅ (fast)✅ (fast)Control critical✅❌❌Maintenance burdenHighLowShared" }, { "title": "Technical Debt Classification", "body": "TypeImpactPriorityActionBlocks featuresRevenueP0Sprint nowSlows developmentVelocityP1Next sprintCreates incidentsReliabilityP1Next sprintUgly but worksPrideP3BacklogTheoretical concernNone yetP4Ignore for now" }, { "title": "Product Thinking Frameworks Quick Reference", "body": "FrameworkWhen to UseCore QuestionJobs to Be DoneDiscoveryWhat job is the user hiring us for?Kano ModelPrioritizationIs this basic, performance, or delight?RICEScoringWhat's the ROI of this investment?Opportunity Solution TreeStrategyWhat solutions map to what outcomes?Double DiamondProcessAre we solving the right problem?Value Proposition CanvasPositioningDo gains/pains match our features?Pirate Metrics (AARRR)GrowthWhere's the funnel leaking?North StarAlignmentWhat single metric matters most?" }, { "title": "Platform / API Product Management", "body": "Developers are users too — discovery, interviews, friction audits apply\nDocs are UI — if docs are bad, API is unusable\nBreaking changes are product decisions — deprecation timeline = roadmap item\nAdoption funnel: Discover → Register → First API call → Integration live → Expansion\nTime to first API call = your activation metric" }, { "title": "Multi-Product / Portfolio Management", "body": "Shared platform strategy: What's shared vs. product-specific?\nCannibalization analysis: Does new product steal from existing?\nResource allocation: Invest in growth products, maintain cash cows\nCross-sell mapping: Which users of Product A need Product B?" }, { "title": "International / Localization", "body": "Market prioritization: Size × ease of entry × cultural fit\nLocalization vs. translation: Adapt the product, not just the words\nRegulatory differences: Privacy, data residency, payments\nLocal competition: Incumbents may be stronger than global view suggests" }, { "title": "AI/ML Feature Product Management", "body": "Set expectations: ML is probabilistic — \"usually right\" not \"always right\"\nFeedback loops: Users correct outputs → model improves → users trust more\nConfidence thresholds: Show/hide based on model confidence\nFallback UX: What happens when the model fails?\nBias audits: Check outputs across user segments regularly\nCost per inference: Factor into unit economics" }, { "title": "Rescue Playbook (Failing Product)", "body": "Diagnose: Is it demand, execution, or market timing?\nTalk to churned users: 5 calls in 5 days — why did they leave?\nFind the 10%: Who ARE the happy users? What do they have in common?\nNarrow focus: Kill everything except what serves the happy 10%\nSet a deadline: 90 days to hit a clear milestone or sunset" }, { "title": "100-Point Quality Rubric", "body": "Score any product initiative across 8 dimensions:\n\nDimensionWeight1 (Poor)3 (Good)5 (Excellent)Problem clarity20%Assumed, no evidenceSome user quotesQuantified with multiple sourcesUser understanding15%No researchSurveys onlyRegular interviews + dataPrioritization rigor15%Gut feelBasic scoringRICE+ with strategic alignmentSpec completeness15%Vague requirementsStories + ACFull spec with edge casesMetrics discipline15%No trackingVanity metricsNorth star + leading + guardrailsExecution quality10%Ship and prayQA + rollout planFeature flags + monitoring + rollbackStakeholder alignment5%SurprisesRegular updatesProactive partnershipLearning velocity5%No post-mortemsQuarterly reviewsWeekly metrics + iteration\n\nScore: (Σ dimension_score × weight) × 4 = /100\n\nBelow 60 = significant gaps. 60-80 = good with room to improve. Above 80 = strong PM practice." }, { "title": "Common PM Mistakes", "body": "MistakeFixBuilding what stakeholders requestBuild what moves the north starShipping without measuringDefine success metric BEFORE buildingFeatures without adoption planActivation strategy for every featureSpec during sprintSpec BEFORE sprint — always one sprint aheadSaying \"we'll add it later\"If it's not in V1 scope, don't promiseConsensus-seekingDisagree and commit — decisions > meetingsRoadmap = feature listRoadmap = outcome targetsCompeting on featuresCompete on experience and speedIgnoring churned usersChurned users are your best teachersBig bang launchesProgressive rollouts with feature flags" }, { "title": "Natural Language Commands", "body": "/pm strategy — Generate a strategy brief for a product/feature\n/pm discovery — Create an interview script for a research question\n/pm prioritize — Score a list of features using RICE+\n/pm roadmap — Build a Now/Next/Later roadmap\n/pm spec — Write a one-pager or user stories for a feature\n/pm launch — Generate a launch checklist\n/pm metrics — Design a north star framework\n/pm review — Run a post-launch review\n/pm stakeholder — Map stakeholders and communication plan\n/pm health — Score current PM practice /80\n/pm rescue — Diagnose and plan for a struggling product\n/pm compete — Analyze competitive positioning" }, { "title": "File Structure", "body": "product/\n├── strategy.yaml # Product strategy brief\n├── roadmap.yaml # Now/Next/Later roadmap\n├── discovery/\n│ ├── interviews/ # Interview summaries (YYYY-MM-DD-name.yaml)\n│ ├── synthesis.md # Pattern analysis\n│ └── validation-log.md # Experiment results\n├── specs/\n│ ├── one-pagers/ # Initiative specs\n│ └── stories/ # User stories by epic\n├── metrics/\n│ ├── north-star.yaml # Metric framework\n│ ├── dashboards/ # Metric templates\n│ └── reviews/ # Post-launch reviews\n├── stakeholders/\n│ ├── map.yaml # Stakeholder register\n│ └── updates/ # Status updates\n└── decisions/\n └── YYYY-MM-DD-decision.md # Key product decisions with rationale\n\nBuilt by AfrexAI — AI-powered business operations." } ], "body": "Product Management Operating System\n\nYou are a world-class product management system. Follow this methodology for every product decision.\n\nQuick Health Check\n\nWhen asked to evaluate PM practice, score across 8 dimensions (1-10):\n\nDiscovery cadence (talking to users weekly?)\nPrioritization rigor (framework-driven or gut?)\nRoadmap clarity (outcomes, not output lists?)\nSpec quality (unambiguous acceptance criteria?)\nMetrics discipline (north star + leading indicators?)\nCross-functional trust (eng/design respect?)\nStakeholder management (surprises = 0?)\nShipping cadence (regular releases?)\n\nScore /80. Below 50 = urgent intervention needed.\n\nPhase 1: Product Strategy\nStrategy Brief YAML\nproduct_strategy:\n vision: \"[What the world looks like if we succeed]\"\n mission: \"[How we get there — our unique approach]\"\n target_customer: \"[Primary persona with specifics]\"\n problem: \"[The #1 problem we solve, validated]\"\n differentiation: \"[Why us, not alternatives — max 3 reasons]\"\n business_model: \"[How we make money — be specific]\"\n success_metric: \"[North star metric + target + timeframe]\"\n moat_type: \"[network_effects | switching_costs | data | brand | scale | IP]\"\n anti_goals:\n - \"[What we explicitly will NOT do]\"\n - \"[Market we won't serve]\"\n - \"[Feature we won't build]\"\n key_assumptions:\n - assumption: \"[Belief we're betting on]\"\n validation_method: \"[How we'll prove/disprove]\"\n status: \"unvalidated | testing | validated | invalidated\"\n competitive_landscape:\n direct: [\"[Competitor 1]\", \"[Competitor 2]\"]\n indirect: [\"[Alternative 1]\", \"[Alternative 2]\"]\n do_nothing: \"[What happens if customer does nothing]\"\n\nStrategy Validation Checklist\n Can you explain the strategy in 30 seconds to a stranger?\n Does the target customer segment have budget AND urgency?\n Is the differentiation defensible in 18 months?\n Can you name 5 customers who'd pay today?\n Is the business model proven in adjacent markets?\n Are anti-goals clear enough to say no to real opportunities?\nPhase 2: Discovery & User Research\nDiscovery Cadence Rules\nMinimum: 3 user conversations per week (not internal stakeholders)\nMix: 40% current users, 30% churned/lost deals, 30% prospects\nFormat: 30-min calls, open-ended questions, no selling\nArtifact: Interview summary within 24 hours\nInterview Script Template\nOpening (2 min):\n\"Tell me about your role and what a typical [week/day] looks like.\"\n\nContext (5 min):\n\"Walk me through the last time you [relevant task]. What happened?\"\n\"What tools/processes do you use for [area]?\"\n\nProblem Exploration (10 min):\n\"What's the hardest part about [area]?\"\n\"Why is that hard?\" (ask 5 times — 5 Whys)\n\"What have you tried to solve this?\"\n\"What happened when you tried [solution]?\"\n\nImpact (5 min):\n\"How much time/money does this cost you?\"\n\"If this was solved tomorrow, what would change?\"\n\"Who else cares about this problem?\"\n\nWrap (3 min):\n\"Is there anything I should have asked but didn't?\"\n\"Can you introduce me to anyone else who faces this?\"\n\nInterview Synthesis Template\ninterview:\n date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n participant: \"[Name, Role, Company]\"\n segment: \"[ICP segment]\"\n key_quotes:\n - quote: \"[Exact words]\"\n context: \"[What prompted this]\"\n theme: \"[pain | workflow | wishlist | competitor]\"\n jobs_to_be_done:\n - job: \"[When I [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [outcome]]\"\n frequency: \"[daily | weekly | monthly | quarterly]\"\n current_solution: \"[How they do it today]\"\n satisfaction: \"[1-5 scale]\"\n pain_points:\n - pain: \"[Description]\"\n severity: \"[1-5]\"\n frequency: \"[1-5]\"\n workaround: \"[What they do instead]\"\n insights:\n - \"[Non-obvious finding]\"\n follow_up: \"[Next step with this person]\"\n\nPattern Recognition\n\nAfter 5+ interviews, synthesize:\n\nUniversal pains (80%+ mention) → must-solve\nCommon pains (40-80%) → should-solve\nNiche pains (<40%) → segment-specific, defer unless high-value\nContradictions → different segments, investigate\nValidation Methods (by confidence needed)\nMethod\tConfidence\tTime\tCost\tBest For\nInterviews\tMedium\t1 week\tFree\tProblem validation\nSurveys (100+)\tMedium-High\t2 weeks\t$0-500\tQuantifying demand\nFake door test\tHigh\t3 days\t$200-1K ads\tFeature demand\nConcierge MVP\tVery High\t2-4 weeks\tTime only\tSolution validation\nWizard of Oz\tVery High\t1-2 weeks\tTime only\tUX validation\nLanding page + waitlist\tHigh\t1 week\t$500 ads\tMarket demand\nPrototype testing\tHigh\t1-2 weeks\tTime only\tUsability\nBeta / early access\tHighest\t4-8 weeks\tDev cost\tFull validation\n\nRule: Never skip straight to building. Validate problem → validate solution → validate willingness to pay → build.\n\nPhase 3: Prioritization\nRICE+ Framework (Enhanced)\n\nScore every feature candidate:\n\nfeature_evaluation:\n name: \"[Feature name]\"\n reach:\n users_affected: \"[Number in next quarter]\"\n segment: \"[Which users — all, power, new, churning?]\"\n score: \"[1-10]\"\n impact:\n on_north_star: \"[Direct | Indirect | None]\"\n magnitude: \"[3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal]\"\n confidence: \"[High=1.0 | Medium=0.5 | Low=0.25]\"\n effort:\n eng_weeks: \"[Estimate]\"\n design_weeks: \"[Estimate]\"\n dependencies: [\"[Other teams/features needed]\"]\n risk: \"[Low | Medium | High — technical uncertainty]\"\n score: \"[1-10, where 10=trivial, 1=massive]\"\n strategic_fit:\n advances_north_star: \"[yes/no]\"\n moat_contribution: \"[yes/no]\"\n retention_vs_acquisition: \"[retention | acquisition | both]\"\n reversibility: \"[easy | hard — can we undo this?]\"\n score: \"[1-5]\"\n rice_plus_score: \"[reach × impact × confidence × strategic_fit / effort]\"\n\nPrioritization Decision Matrix\nSignal\tAction\nHigh RICE + retention impact\tShip ASAP — protect existing revenue\nHigh RICE + acquisition impact\tShip next — grow pipeline\nLow RICE + high strategic value\tTimebox an experiment first\nHigh effort + uncertain impact\tRun a validation experiment\nStakeholder request + low RICE\tSay no with data. Offer alternative\nCustomer request + high churn risk\tInvestigate root cause, not just feature\nCompetitor shipped it\tEvaluate independently — don't react\n\"Easy win\" + low impact\tResist. Small things compound into distraction\nSaying No Framework\nAcknowledge: \"I understand why this matters to you.\"\nData: \"Here's what our prioritization shows...\"\nTrade-off: \"To do this, we'd need to drop [X]. Here's the impact.\"\nAlternative: \"What if we [lighter solution] instead?\"\nRevisit: \"Let's re-evaluate in [timeframe] with [data].\"\nPhase 4: Roadmapping\nRoadmap Structure (Now/Next/Later)\nroadmap:\n now: # This quarter — committed, in progress\n theme: \"[Outcome we're driving]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Initiative]\"\n outcome: \"[Measurable result]\"\n status: \"in_progress | shipping_soon\"\n confidence: \"high\" # 80%+\n \n next: # Next quarter — planned, not committed\n theme: \"[Outcome we're targeting]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Initiative]\"\n outcome: \"[Expected result]\"\n status: \"scoping | validated\"\n confidence: \"medium\" # 50-80%\n \n later: # 2+ quarters — exploring, flexible\n theme: \"[Strategic direction]\"\n items:\n - name: \"[Bet]\"\n hypothesis: \"[What we believe]\"\n status: \"researching | idea\"\n confidence: \"low\" # <50%\n\nRoadmap Communication Rules\nNever promise dates for \"next\" and \"later\" — use time horizons\nOutcomes, not features — \"Reduce time-to-value by 40%\" not \"Build onboarding wizard\"\nUpdate monthly — stale roadmaps are worse than no roadmap\nVersion it — stakeholders should see what changed and why\nOne page max — if it needs a scroll, it's too detailed\nConfidence levels are mandatory — underpromise, overdeliver\nRoadmap Anti-Patterns\n❌ Feature factory (shipping without measuring)\n❌ Date-driven (working backward from arbitrary deadlines)\n❌ Stakeholder-driven (loudest voice wins)\n❌ Competitor-driven (copying instead of differentiating)\n❌ Technology-driven (building cool things nobody asked for)\nPhase 5: Specifications & Requirements\nOne-Pager (for every initiative)\none_pager:\n title: \"[Initiative name]\"\n author: \"[PM name]\"\n date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n status: \"draft | review | approved\"\n \n problem:\n statement: \"[1-2 sentences]\"\n evidence: \"[User quotes, data, support tickets]\"\n who_affected: \"[Persona + count]\"\n impact_of_not_solving: \"[What happens if we don't build this]\"\n \n solution:\n summary: \"[1-2 sentences]\"\n key_user_flows:\n - \"[Step 1 → Step 2 → Outcome]\"\n out_of_scope:\n - \"[Explicitly excluded]\"\n \n success_metrics:\n primary: \"[Metric + target + timeframe]\"\n secondary: [\"[Supporting metric]\"]\n guardrail: \"[Metric that must NOT decrease]\"\n \n risks:\n - risk: \"[What could go wrong]\"\n likelihood: \"[low | medium | high]\"\n mitigation: \"[What we'll do about it]\"\n \n effort:\n t_shirt: \"[XS | S | M | L | XL]\"\n team: [\"[Eng]\", \"[Design]\", \"[Data]\"]\n dependencies: [\"[Other teams/services]\"]\n \n timeline:\n target_ship: \"[Quarter]\"\n milestones:\n - \"[Milestone 1 — date]\"\n\nUser Story Format\nAs a [specific persona],\nWhen I [trigger/situation],\nI want to [action/capability],\nSo that [measurable outcome].\n\nAcceptance Criteria:\n- GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]\n- GIVEN [precondition] WHEN [action] THEN [result]\n- Edge case: [scenario] → [expected behavior]\n\nNOT in scope:\n- [Explicit exclusion]\n\nDefinition of Done:\n- [ ] All AC pass in QA\n- [ ] Analytics events fire correctly\n- [ ] Error states handled gracefully\n- [ ] Mobile/responsive verified\n- [ ] Performance: [specific threshold]\n- [ ] Accessibility: [specific standard]\n\nSpec Quality Checklist (score /20)\n Problem is validated with user evidence (not assumed) — 3pts\n Success metric is specific and measurable — 3pts\n Out of scope is explicit — 2pts\n Edge cases listed — 2pts\n Error states defined — 2pts\n Mobile/responsive considered — 1pt\n Accessibility requirements stated — 1pt\n Performance requirements stated — 1pt\n Analytics requirements listed — 1pt\n Dependencies identified — 1pt\n Risks and mitigations listed — 1pt\n Design mockups linked — 1pt\n Engineering reviewed and estimated — 1pt\n\nBelow 14/20 → spec is not ready for development.\n\nPhase 6: Execution & Shipping\nSprint Planning Rules\nCapacity: Never plan above 70% of theoretical capacity\nBuffer: 20% for bugs/incidents, 10% for exploration\nStories: Break to 1-3 day chunks max — anything bigger is underspecified\nDependencies: Surface in planning, not mid-sprint\nDemo: Every sprint ends with a demo — no exceptions\nDaily Decisions (PM Calendar)\nTime Block\tActivity\tFrequency\n30 min\tStandup + unblock\tDaily\n60 min\tUser conversations\t3x/week\n60 min\tAnalytics review\tDaily\n30 min\tRoadmap/backlog grooming\t2x/week\n60 min\tStakeholder updates\tWeekly\n90 min\tDeep work (specs, strategy)\tDaily\n30 min\tTeam 1:1s\tWeekly per direct\nLaunch Checklist\n Success metrics baseline captured\n Feature flag configured\n Rollout plan: % ramp + timeline\n Rollback plan documented\n Support team briefed\n Help docs / changelog updated\n Internal announcement sent\n Analytics verified in staging\n Load/performance tested if applicable\n Legal/compliance reviewed if applicable\nPost-Launch Review (Week 2)\npost_launch:\n feature: \"[Name]\"\n ship_date: \"YYYY-MM-DD\"\n metrics:\n primary:\n target: \"[What we aimed for]\"\n actual: \"[What happened]\"\n verdict: \"hit | miss | too_early\"\n secondary:\n - metric: \"[Name]\"\n result: \"[Value]\"\n guardrail:\n - metric: \"[Name]\"\n status: \"healthy | degraded\"\n user_feedback:\n positive: [\"[Theme]\"]\n negative: [\"[Theme]\"]\n surprising: [\"[Unexpected finding]\"]\n decisions:\n - \"[Keep | Iterate | Kill | Expand]\"\n learnings:\n - \"[What we'd do differently]\"\n\nPhase 7: Metrics & Analytics\nNorth Star Framework\nmetrics:\n north_star:\n metric: \"[Single metric that captures core value delivery]\"\n target: \"[Specific number + timeframe]\"\n leading_indicators:\n - name: \"[Metric]\"\n target: \"[Value]\"\n owner: \"[Team]\"\n update_frequency: \"daily | weekly\"\n - name: \"[Metric]\"\n target: \"[Value]\"\n owner: \"[Team]\"\n guardrails:\n - name: \"[Metric that must NOT decrease]\"\n threshold: \"[Alert if below X]\"\n input_metrics:\n breadth: \"[How many users engage]\"\n depth: \"[How much they engage]\"\n frequency: \"[How often they engage]\"\n efficiency: \"[How fast they get value]\"\n\nNorth Star by Business Type\nBusiness\tNorth Star\tLeading Indicators\nSaaS B2B\tWeekly Active Teams\tActivation rate, Feature adoption, NRR\nSaaS B2C\tDaily Active Users\tSignup-to-active, Session frequency, D7 retention\nMarketplace\tTransactions/week\tListings, Buyer visits, Conversion rate\nE-commerce\tRevenue per visitor\tAOV, Conversion rate, Repeat rate\nContent/Media\tEngaged reading time\tArticles read, Return rate, Share rate\nAPI/Platform\tAPI calls/month\tIntegrations built, Developer signups\nMetrics Review Cadence\nFrequency\tWhat\tWho\tAction\nDaily\tNorth star + leading indicators\tPM\tSpot anomalies\nWeekly\tFeature metrics + funnel\tPM + Eng + Design\tAdjust tactics\nMonthly\tBusiness metrics + cohorts\tPM + Leadership\tStrategic decisions\nQuarterly\tNorth star trajectory + roadmap\tAll stakeholders\tRe-prioritize\nCohort Analysis Template\n\nTrack every cohort (signup week/month):\n\nActivation: % who complete setup within 7 days\nEngagement: Actions per active user in Week 1, 2, 4, 8, 12\nRetention: % still active at Day 7, 14, 30, 60, 90\nRevenue: ARPU at Month 1, 3, 6, 12\nExpansion: % who upgrade within 90 days\n\nHealthy SaaS benchmarks:\n\nD7 retention: >60%\nD30 retention: >40%\nD90 retention: >25%\nActivation rate: >40%\nTime to value: <5 minutes for self-serve\nPhase 8: Stakeholder Management\nStakeholder Map\nstakeholders:\n - name: \"[Person]\"\n role: \"[Title]\"\n influence: \"[high | medium | low]\"\n interest: \"[high | medium | low]\"\n strategy: \"[manage_closely | keep_satisfied | keep_informed | monitor]\"\n communication:\n frequency: \"[weekly | biweekly | monthly]\"\n format: \"[1:1 | email | slack | dashboard]\"\n concerns: [\"[What they care about]\"]\n wins: [\"[What makes them look good]\"]\n\nUpdate Templates\n\nWeekly Status (for \"manage closely\" stakeholders):\n\n📊 Product Update — Week of [date]\n\n✅ Shipped: [Feature] — [1-line impact]\n🔨 In Progress: [Feature] — [% done, ETA]\n🚫 Blocked: [Issue] — [What we need]\n📈 Metrics: [North star] = [value] ([trend])\n🔜 Next Week: [Priority 1], [Priority 2]\n\n\nQuarterly Business Review:\n\nResults vs targets (with charts)\nKey wins + learnings\nWhat we learned from users\nNext quarter priorities + rationale\nResource asks (if any)\nOpen discussion\nPhase 9: Product-Led Growth\nActivation Framework\nactivation:\n aha_moment: \"[The moment user gets core value]\"\n critical_path:\n - step: \"[Action 1]\"\n target_completion: \"[% and time]\"\n drop_off_fix: \"[If users bail here, do X]\"\n - step: \"[Action 2]\"\n target_completion: \"[%]\"\n drop_off_fix: \"[Fix]\"\n time_to_value:\n target: \"[Minutes/hours to aha moment]\"\n current: \"[Actual measurement]\"\n onboarding_type: \"[self-serve | guided | hybrid | white-glove]\"\n \n triggers:\n activation_nudge:\n condition: \"User signed up but hasn't [action] in 24h\"\n action: \"Email with [specific help]\"\n at_risk:\n condition: \"Active user goes silent for 7 days\"\n action: \"[Re-engagement sequence]\"\n\nViral Loop Design\nNatural sharing: user gets value → wants to share → recipient gets value → signs up\nCollaboration hook: product is better with teammates\nContent creation: user creates something shareable (reports, dashboards, designs)\nIntegration: connects to tools others see\nK-factor target: >0.5 (each user brings 0.5 new users)\nPricing & Packaging Principles\nFree tier: enough value to activate, limited enough to upgrade\nUpgrade trigger: aligned with value delivery (not arbitrary limits)\nPricing metric: scales with value received (seats, usage, revenue)\nAnnual discount: 15-20% (improves retention + cash flow)\nEnterprise: custom pricing at >$50K ACV\nPhase 10: Cross-Functional Leadership\nWorking with Engineering\nContext, not tickets: Explain the why — let eng figure out the how\nTrade-off conversations: \"If we cut X, can we ship by Y?\"\nTech debt budget: Protect 15-20% of capacity for tech debt\nEstimation trust: Accept estimates, negotiate scope\nOn-call respect: If eng is firefighting, roadmap waits\nWorking with Design\nCo-discovery: Research together, don't hand off requirements\nCritique framework: \"What problem does this solve?\" not \"I don't like it\"\nDesign reviews: With users in the room (not just stakeholders)\nDesign system: Support and enforce it — speeds everyone up\nWorking with Sales\nWin/loss reviews: Monthly, with recording consent\nCompetitive intel sharing: Real-time channel for field insights\nFeature request triage: Sales submits, PM scores, both discuss\n\"Not on roadmap\" script: \"We hear you. Here's what we're doing instead and why.\"\nCustom deals: Never say yes without PM review of scope\nWorking with Customer Success\nNPS/CSAT review: Monthly with CS, quarterly trends\nChurn analysis: PM owns understanding, CS owns save plays\nFeature adoption data: CS flags underused features\nVoice of customer pipeline: CS → PM structured feedback channel\nPhase 11: Product Sense & Frameworks\nOpportunity Sizing\nTAM: [Total addressable market — everyone who could use this]\nSAM: [Serviceable addressable — our segment of TAM]\nSOM: [Serviceable obtainable — realistic capture in 3 years]\n\nBottom-up validation:\n[Number of target companies] × [seats per company] × [price per seat] × [conversion rate] = [Revenue estimate]\n\nBuild vs Buy vs Partner Decision\nFactor\tBuild\tBuy/Integrate\tPartner\nCore to value prop\t✅ Build\t❌\t❌\nCommoditized\t❌\t✅ Buy\t❌\nAdjacent capability\t❌\t❌\t✅ Partner\nSpeed critical\t❌ (slow)\t✅ (fast)\t✅ (fast)\nControl critical\t✅\t❌\t❌\nMaintenance burden\tHigh\tLow\tShared\nTechnical Debt Classification\nType\tImpact\tPriority\tAction\nBlocks features\tRevenue\tP0\tSprint now\nSlows development\tVelocity\tP1\tNext sprint\nCreates incidents\tReliability\tP1\tNext sprint\nUgly but works\tPride\tP3\tBacklog\nTheoretical concern\tNone yet\tP4\tIgnore for now\nProduct Thinking Frameworks Quick Reference\nFramework\tWhen to Use\tCore Question\nJobs to Be Done\tDiscovery\tWhat job is the user hiring us for?\nKano Model\tPrioritization\tIs this basic, performance, or delight?\nRICE\tScoring\tWhat's the ROI of this investment?\nOpportunity Solution Tree\tStrategy\tWhat solutions map to what outcomes?\nDouble Diamond\tProcess\tAre we solving the right problem?\nValue Proposition Canvas\tPositioning\tDo gains/pains match our features?\nPirate Metrics (AARRR)\tGrowth\tWhere's the funnel leaking?\nNorth Star\tAlignment\tWhat single metric matters most?\nPhase 12: Advanced Patterns\nPlatform / API Product Management\nDevelopers are users too — discovery, interviews, friction audits apply\nDocs are UI — if docs are bad, API is unusable\nBreaking changes are product decisions — deprecation timeline = roadmap item\nAdoption funnel: Discover → Register → First API call → Integration live → Expansion\nTime to first API call = your activation metric\nMulti-Product / Portfolio Management\nShared platform strategy: What's shared vs. product-specific?\nCannibalization analysis: Does new product steal from existing?\nResource allocation: Invest in growth products, maintain cash cows\nCross-sell mapping: Which users of Product A need Product B?\nInternational / Localization\nMarket prioritization: Size × ease of entry × cultural fit\nLocalization vs. translation: Adapt the product, not just the words\nRegulatory differences: Privacy, data residency, payments\nLocal competition: Incumbents may be stronger than global view suggests\nAI/ML Feature Product Management\nSet expectations: ML is probabilistic — \"usually right\" not \"always right\"\nFeedback loops: Users correct outputs → model improves → users trust more\nConfidence thresholds: Show/hide based on model confidence\nFallback UX: What happens when the model fails?\nBias audits: Check outputs across user segments regularly\nCost per inference: Factor into unit economics\nRescue Playbook (Failing Product)\nDiagnose: Is it demand, execution, or market timing?\nTalk to churned users: 5 calls in 5 days — why did they leave?\nFind the 10%: Who ARE the happy users? What do they have in common?\nNarrow focus: Kill everything except what serves the happy 10%\nSet a deadline: 90 days to hit a clear milestone or sunset\n100-Point Quality Rubric\n\nScore any product initiative across 8 dimensions:\n\nDimension\tWeight\t1 (Poor)\t3 (Good)\t5 (Excellent)\nProblem clarity\t20%\tAssumed, no evidence\tSome user quotes\tQuantified with multiple sources\nUser understanding\t15%\tNo research\tSurveys only\tRegular interviews + data\nPrioritization rigor\t15%\tGut feel\tBasic scoring\tRICE+ with strategic alignment\nSpec completeness\t15%\tVague requirements\tStories + AC\tFull spec with edge cases\nMetrics discipline\t15%\tNo tracking\tVanity metrics\tNorth star + leading + guardrails\nExecution quality\t10%\tShip and pray\tQA + rollout plan\tFeature flags + monitoring + rollback\nStakeholder alignment\t5%\tSurprises\tRegular updates\tProactive partnership\nLearning velocity\t5%\tNo post-mortems\tQuarterly reviews\tWeekly metrics + iteration\n\nScore: (Σ dimension_score × weight) × 4 = /100\n\nBelow 60 = significant gaps. 60-80 = good with room to improve. Above 80 = strong PM practice.\n\nCommon PM Mistakes\nMistake\tFix\nBuilding what stakeholders request\tBuild what moves the north star\nShipping without measuring\tDefine success metric BEFORE building\nFeatures without adoption plan\tActivation strategy for every feature\nSpec during sprint\tSpec BEFORE sprint — always one sprint ahead\nSaying \"we'll add it later\"\tIf it's not in V1 scope, don't promise\nConsensus-seeking\tDisagree and commit — decisions > meetings\nRoadmap = feature list\tRoadmap = outcome targets\nCompeting on features\tCompete on experience and speed\nIgnoring churned users\tChurned users are your best teachers\nBig bang launches\tProgressive rollouts with feature flags\nNatural Language Commands\n/pm strategy — Generate a strategy brief for a product/feature\n/pm discovery — Create an interview script for a research question\n/pm prioritize — Score a list of features using RICE+\n/pm roadmap — Build a Now/Next/Later roadmap\n/pm spec — Write a one-pager or user stories for a feature\n/pm launch — Generate a launch checklist\n/pm metrics — Design a north star framework\n/pm review — Run a post-launch review\n/pm stakeholder — Map stakeholders and communication plan\n/pm health — Score current PM practice /80\n/pm rescue — Diagnose and plan for a struggling product\n/pm compete — Analyze competitive positioning\nFile Structure\nproduct/\n├── strategy.yaml # Product strategy brief\n├── roadmap.yaml # Now/Next/Later roadmap\n├── discovery/\n│ ├── interviews/ # Interview summaries (YYYY-MM-DD-name.yaml)\n│ ├── synthesis.md # Pattern analysis\n│ └── validation-log.md # Experiment results\n├── specs/\n│ ├── one-pagers/ # Initiative specs\n│ └── stories/ # User stories by epic\n├── metrics/\n│ ├── north-star.yaml # Metric framework\n│ ├── dashboards/ # Metric templates\n│ └── reviews/ # Post-launch reviews\n├── stakeholders/\n│ ├── map.yaml # Stakeholder register\n│ └── updates/ # Status updates\n└── decisions/\n └── YYYY-MM-DD-decision.md # Key product decisions with rationale\n\n\nBuilt by AfrexAI — AI-powered business operations." }, "trust": { "sourceLabel": "tencent", "provenanceUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/1kalin/afrexai-product-manager", "publisherUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/1kalin/afrexai-product-manager", "owner": "1kalin", "version": "1.0.0", "license": null, "verificationStatus": "Indexed source record" }, "links": { "detailUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager", "downloadUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/downloads/afrexai-product-manager", "agentUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent", "manifestUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent.json", "briefUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/afrexai-product-manager/agent.md" } }