justin/pm-claude-skills
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix: sync all skill updates and new skills into plugin bundles

Browse Source 
- Synced 97 existing skill SKILL.md files from skills/ to their plugin bundle copies
- Added 7 new skills to plugin bundles:
  - seo-content-brief, media-pitch -> pm-gtm
  - tax-planning-checklist -> pm-finance
  - change-management-plan -> pm-hr
  - sales-forecasting-model -> pm-sales
  - workshop-facilitation-guide -> pm-operations
  - teaching-lesson-plan -> pm-cross

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
mohitagw15856
2026-04-20 21:00:00 +01:00
parent d7f6c2cd05
commit 513e1d3ce7
67 changed files with 1851 additions and 507 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
plugins/pm-discovery/skills/assumption-mapper/SKILL.md
+39 -16
View File
@@ -1,36 +1,59 @@
---
name: assumption-mapper
description: Extract and risk-rate all hidden assumptions in a product brief or PRD
tool_integration: Miro
description: "Extract and risk-rate hidden assumptions in a product brief or PRD. Use when asked to review a product brief for assumptions, audit a PRD for risks, find hidden assumptions, validate product plans, or run an assumption analysis. Produces a prioritised assumption map with confidence and impact scores, recommended validation methods, and critical assumption flags."
---
# Assumption Mapping Skill
## Purpose
# Assumption Mapper Skill
Surface and prioritize the untested assumptions embedded in any product plan before development begins.
## Required Inputs
Ask the user for these if not provided:
- **Product brief, PRD, or concept description** (even rough notes work)
- **Stage** (concept / discovery / pre-build / post-launch — affects which assumptions matter most)
## Process
1. Read the provided brief, PRD, or concept description
2. Extract all assumptions across four categories:
2. Extract assumptions across four categories:
- **Desirability** (do users want this?)
- **Feasibility** (can we build it?)
- **Viability** (will it sustain the business?)
- **Usability** (can users actually use it?)
3. For each assumption, score:
3. Score each assumption:
- Confidence (1-5): How sure are we this is true?
- Impact (1-5): How badly does the plan fail if this assumption is wrong?
- Priority = Impact minus Confidence (higher score = test this first)
4. Output a ranked list with recommended validation methods
- Priority = Impact − Confidence (higher = test first)
4. **Validate completeness** — Ensure at least one assumption per category. If a category is empty, re-read the brief looking specifically for that type.
5. Output a ranked list with recommended validation methods
## Output Format
## Output Structure
### Assumption Map: [Feature/Product Name]
| Assumption | Category | Confidence | Impact | Priority Score | Recommended Validation |
|------------|----------|------------|--------|----------------|----------------------|
| Assumption | Category | Confidence | Impact | Priority | Validation Method |
|------------|----------|------------|--------|----------|-------------------|
| [assumption] | [type] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [score] | [method] |
#### Top 3 Assumptions to Validate First
[Detailed recommendations for highest-priority items]
#### Critical Assumptions (Impact 4+ and Confidence 2 or below)
[Flagged items with detailed validation recommendations]
## Notes
- Flag any assumption that scores 4+ on Impact and 2 or below on Confidence as CRITICAL
- Suggest specific research methods: usability test, survey, prototype test, data analysis
#### Top 3 Assumptions to Validate First
[Detailed recommendations including specific research method, estimated effort, and what the result would change]
## Example (Partial)
Input: *"We're building a self-serve onboarding flow to reduce time-to-value for SMB customers."*
| Assumption | Category | Confidence | Impact | Priority | Validation Method |
|------------|----------|------------|--------|----------|-------------------|
| SMB users can complete onboarding without human help | Usability | 2 | 5 | 3 | Unmoderated usability test (n=8) |
| Faster onboarding correlates with higher retention | Viability | 3 | 4 | 1 | Cohort analysis of current onboarding times vs. 90-day retention |
| The current onboarding is the primary reason for slow time-to-value | Desirability | 2 | 4 | 2 | User interviews with recent churned SMB accounts |
## Quality Checks
- [ ] At least one assumption per category (Desirability, Feasibility, Viability, Usability)
- [ ] All Impact 4+ / Confidence 2− assumptions flagged as CRITICAL
- [ ] Each validation method is specific (not just "do research" — name the method and sample size)
- [ ] Priority scores are consistent (Impact − Confidence, higher = more urgent)