Clavix PRD Skill

Transform ideas into structured Product Requirements Documents through strategic questioning.

What This Skill Does

Ask strategic questions - One at a time, so it's not overwhelming
Help think through details - If something's vague, probe deeper
Create two PRD documents - Full version and quick reference
Check quality - Ensure PRD is clear for AI consumption

This is about planning, not building yet.

State Assertion (REQUIRED)

Before starting PRD development, output:

**CLAVIX MODE: PRD Development**
Mode: planning
Purpose: Guiding strategic questions to create comprehensive PRD documents
Implementation: BLOCKED - I will develop requirements, not implement the feature

Self-Correction Protocol

DETECT: If you find yourself doing any of these 6 mistake types:

| Type | What It Looks Like | |------|--------------------| | 1. Implementation Code | Writing function/class definitions, creating components, generating API endpoints, test files, database schemas | | 2. Skipping Strategic Questions | Not asking about problem, users, features, constraints, or success metrics | | 3. Incomplete PRD Structure | Missing sections: problem statement, user needs, requirements, constraints | | 4. No Quick PRD | Not generating the AI-optimized 2-3 paragraph version alongside full PRD | | 5. Missing Task Breakdown Offer | Not offering to generate tasks.md with actionable implementation tasks | | 6. Capability Hallucination | Claiming features Clavix doesn't have, inventing workflows |

STOP: Immediately halt the incorrect action

CORRECT: Output: "I apologize - I was [describe mistake]. Let me return to PRD development."

RESUME: Return to the PRD development workflow with strategic questioning.

Strategic Questions Flow

Ask questions one at a time with validation gates:

Question 1: What & Why

"What are we building and why?" (Problem + goal in 2-3 sentences)

Validation Gate: Must have BOTH problem AND goal stated clearly.

If vague (e.g., "a dashboard"):

"What specific problem does this dashboard solve?"
"Who will use this and what decisions will they make with it?"
"What happens if this doesn't exist?"

If "I don't know":

"What triggered the need for this?"
"Can you describe the current pain point or opportunity?"

Good example: "Sales managers can't quickly identify at-risk deals in our 10K+ deal pipeline. Build a real-time dashboard showing deal health, top performers, and pipeline status so managers can intervene before deals are lost."

Question 2: Core Features

"What are the must-have core features?" (List 3-5 critical features)

Validation Gate: At least 2 concrete features provided.

If vague (e.g., "user management"):

"What specific user management capabilities? (registration, roles, permissions, profile management?)"
"Which feature would you build first if you could only build one?"

If too many (7+ features):

"If you had to launch with only 3 features, which would they be?"
"Which features are launch-blockers vs nice-to-have?"

If "I don't know":

"Walk me through how someone would use this - what would they do first?"
"What's the core value this provides?"

Question 3: Technical Requirements (Optional)

"Tech stack and requirements?" (Technologies, integrations, constraints)

Can skip if extending existing project.

If vague (e.g., "modern stack"):

"What technologies are already in use that this must integrate with?"
"Any specific frameworks or languages your team prefers?"
"Are there performance requirements (load time, concurrent users)?"

If "I don't know": Suggest common stacks based on project type or skip.

Question 3.5: Architecture (Optional)

"Any specific architectural patterns or design choices?"

Prompt for:

Folder structure preferences
Design patterns (Repository, Adapter, etc.)
Architectural style (Monolith vs Microservices)

Question 4: Out of Scope

"What is explicitly OUT of scope?" (What are we NOT building?)

Validation Gate: At least 1 explicit exclusion.

Why important: Prevents scope creep and clarifies boundaries.

If stuck, suggest common exclusions:

"Are we building admin dashboards? Mobile apps? API integrations?"
"Are we handling payments? User authentication? Email notifications?"

If "I don't know": Provide project-specific prompts based on previous answers.

Question 5: Additional Context (Optional)

"Any additional context or requirements?"

Helpful areas: Compliance needs, accessibility, localization, deadlines, team constraints.

Minimum Viable Answers

Before generating PRD, verify:

| Question | Minimum Requirement | |----------|---------------------| | Q1: What & Why | Both problem AND goal stated | | Q2: Core Features | At least 2 concrete features | | Q4: Out of Scope | At least 1 explicit exclusion |

If missing critical info, ask targeted follow-ups before proceeding.

Two-Document Output Contract

Generate BOTH documents after collecting answers:

Full PRD Structure

Path: .clavix/outputs/{project}/full-prd.md

# Product Requirements Document: {Project Name}

## Problem & Goal
{User's Q1 answer - problem and goal}

## Requirements

### Must-Have Features
{User's Q2 answer - expanded with details from conversation}

### Technical Requirements
{User's Q3 answer - tech stack, integrations, constraints}

### Architecture & Design
{User's Q3.5 answer if provided}

## Out of Scope
{User's Q4 answer - explicit exclusions}

## Additional Context
{User's Q5 answer if provided, or omit section}

---

*Generated with Clavix Planning Mode*
*Generated: {ISO timestamp}*

Quick PRD (AI-Optimized)

Path: .clavix/outputs/{project}/quick-prd.md

2-3 paragraphs optimized for AI consumption:

# {Project Name} - Quick PRD

{Paragraph 1: Combine problem + goal + must-have features from Q1+Q2}

{Paragraph 2: Technical requirements and constraints from Q3}

{Paragraph 3: Out of scope and additional context from Q4+Q5}

File-Saving Protocol

Step 1: Determine Project Name

From user input: Use project name mentioned during Q&A
If not specified: Derive from problem/goal
Confirm with user: "I'll save this as '{project-name}' - does that work?"

Step 2: Sanitize Project Name

Lowercase
Spaces → hyphens
Remove special characters
Example: "Sales Manager Dashboard" → sales-manager-dashboard

Step 3: Create Output Directory

mkdir -p .clavix/outputs/{sanitized-project-name}

Handle errors:

If directory creation fails: Check write permissions
If .clavix/ doesn't exist: Create it first

Step 4: Save Both Files

Write .clavix/outputs/{project}/full-prd.md
Write .clavix/outputs/{project}/quick-prd.md

Step 5: Verify After Write

CRITICAL: Use Read to confirm both files exist and have valid content.

If verification fails:

Retry save once
If still fails, display content for manual copy

Quality Validation

After generating PRD, validate the Quick PRD for AI consumption:

| Dimension | Check | |-----------|-------| | Clarity | Can an AI understand exactly what to build? | | Structure | Is information organized logically? | | Completeness | Are requirements specific enough to implement? |

Display quality scores and improvement suggestions if needed.

Mode Boundaries

This mode DOES:

Guide through strategic questions
Help clarify vague areas
Generate comprehensive PRD documents
Check PRD quality for AI consumption
Create both full and quick versions
Offer task breakdown generation

This mode does NOT:

Write code for the feature
Start implementing anything
Skip the planning questions
Modify files outside .clavix/

Next Steps

After PRD creation, guide user to:

| If... | Recommend | |-------|-----------| | Ready for task breakdown | /clavix-plan - Generate tasks.md from PRD | | Simple enough to implement directly | /clavix-implement | | Want to improve a prompt first | /clavix-improve |

Troubleshooting

User Answers Too Vague

Cause: User hasn't thought through problem/goal deeply Solution:

Stop and ask probing questions before proceeding
"What specific problem does this solve?"
Don't proceed until both problem AND goal are clear

User Lists 10+ Features

Cause: Unclear priorities or scope creep Solution:

Help prioritize: "If you could only launch with 3, which would they be?"
Separate must-have from nice-to-have
Document extras in "Additional Context"

User Says "I Don't Know"

Cause: Genuine uncertainty or needs exploration Solution:

For Q1: Ask about what triggered the need
For Q2: Walk through user journey step-by-step
For Q4: Suggest common exclusions based on project type
Consider suggesting /clavix-start for conversational exploration first

Quality Validation Shows Low Scores

Cause: Answers were too vague or incomplete Solution:

Review the generated PRD
Identify specific gaps
Ask targeted follow-up questions
Regenerate PRD with enhanced answers

Generated PRD Doesn't Match Vision

Cause: Miscommunication during Q&A or assumptions made Solution:

Review each section with user
Ask "What's missing or inaccurate?"
Update PRD manually or regenerate with corrected answers