diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index b5bc9d2..987e9fe 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -5,7 +5,15 @@ [![License: MIT](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-MIT-yellow.svg)](https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT) [![GitHub stars](https://img.shields.io/github/stars/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills.svg)](https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/stargazers) -> 📖 **Background**: These Skills emerged from two Medium articles: [Part 1 — How Skills changed my workflow](https://medium.com/product-powerhouse/claude-skills-the-ai-feature-thats-quietly-changing-how-product-managers-work-aad5d8d0640a) and [Part 2 — The complete 12-skill toolkit](https://medium.com/@mohit15856/12-claude-skills-for-product-managers-the-complete-toolkit-with-skill-files-for-jira-figma-fcc73a4c1e58). + +> 📖 **Background**: Built across a four-part Medium series: +> - [Part 1 — How Skills changed my PM workflow](https://medium.com/product-powerhouse/claude-skills-the-ai-feature-thats-quietly-changing-how-product-managers-work-aad5d8d0640a) +> - [Part 2 — The complete 12-skill toolkit](https://medium.com/@mohit15856/12-claude-skills-for-product-managers-the-complete-toolkit-with-skill-files-for-jira-figma-fcc73a4c1e58) +> - [Part 3 — Building Skills the right way (official guide)](https://medium.com/@mohit15856/claude-skills-advanced-guide-what-3-months-of-daily-pm-use-actually-taught-me-18324d6ef7bc) +> - [Part 4 — Advanced skills based on what top companies want](https://medium.com/product-powerhouse/claude-skills-the-ai-feature-thats-quietly-changing-how-product-managers-work-aad5d8d0640a) +> +> Product Management Skills for Claude AI — 18 skills across the full PM lifecycle. Save 10+ hours per week. + ## What Are These Skills? @@ -91,6 +99,17 @@ That's it! Claude now knows your PRD format. | **Competitive Analysis** | Structured competitive assessments | — | [View](skills/competitive-analysis) | | **Design Handoff Brief** | PM-to-designer structured briefs | Figma, Notion | [View](skills/design-handoff-brief) | +### 🧠 Advanced Skills (Part 4 — Role-Based Capabilities) +| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder | +|-------|---------|------|--------| +| **Competitive Intelligence Monitor** | Weekly diff-based competitor tracking | Notion, OpenClaw | [View](skills/competitive-intelligence-monitor) | +| **Experiment Designer** | A/B test design + results interpretation | Analytics | [View](skills/experiment-designer) | +| **Stakeholder Influence Mapper** | Influence strategy + tailored talking points | Slack | [View](skills/stakeholder-influence-mapper) | +| **Ambiguity Resolver** | Structures vague briefs into actionable problem statements | Notion | [View](skills/ambiguity-resolver) | +| **Multi-Source Signal Synthesiser** | Reconciles user signals across all research channels | Notion, OpenClaw | [View](skills/multi-source-signal-synthesiser) | +| **Strategic Narrative Generator** | Roadmap-to-strategy storytelling for executives | Notion | [View](skills/strategic-narrative-generator) | + + Want a specific Skill? [Request it here](https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/issues/new?template=skill-request.md) diff --git a/skills/ambiguity-resolver/SKILL.md b/skills/ambiguity-resolver/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a026517 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/ambiguity-resolver/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@ +--- +name: ambiguity-resolver +description: Structures vague opportunities and unclear briefs into actionable +one-page problem statements. Use when user has a vague brief, undefined problem, +unclear opportunity, or says "we need to figure out what to do about X", "can +you help me make sense of this", or "I've been asked to look into Y". +metadata: + author: Mohit Aggarwal + version: 1.0.0 + category: discovery + tags: [discovery, strategy, problem-framing, ambiguity] + documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills +--- +# Ambiguity Resolver Skill + +## Purpose +Turn vague briefs and half-formed opportunities into structured, actionable +problem statements — so you can reply with clarity instead of asking for three +more meetings. + +## Three-Stage Process + +### Stage 1: Reframe +- Restate the vague input as 3-5 explicit questions that need answering +- Identify the unstated assumptions hidden in the brief +- Surface the real decision this feeds into (what will someone do differently + once this is resolved?) + +### Stage 2: Scope +- Define what is explicitly IN scope +- Define what is explicitly OUT of scope (equally important) +- Identify the deadline pressure: is this urgent/important, important/not urgent, + or unclear? +- Name who owns the final decision and who needs to be consulted + +### Stage 3: Action +- Define the minimum viable research: 2-3 activities maximum that would give + enough signal to move forward with confidence +- Time estimate for each activity +- What each activity would tell you (and what it wouldn't) +- Proposed check-in point: when to regroup before committing to more + +## Output Format + +### Problem Brief: [Opportunity Area] + +**Restated as questions:** +1. [Question 1] +2. [Question 2] +3. [Question 3] + +**Unstated assumptions we should surface:** +- [Assumption 1] +- [Assumption 2] + +**In scope:** [Clear boundary] +**Out of scope:** [Clear boundary] +**Decision owner:** [Name/role] +**Timeline:** [Real deadline if known, or "unclear — recommend setting one"] + +**Minimum viable research:** +| Activity | Time required | What it tells us | +|----------|--------------|------------------| +| [activity] | [time] | [insight] | + +**Proposed check-in:** After [activity], regroup to decide whether to proceed +or pivot. diff --git a/skills/experiment-designer/SKILL.md b/skills/experiment-designer/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..122e7d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/experiment-designer/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +--- +name: experiment-designer +description: Designs A/B tests from hypotheses and interprets experiment results +with statistical rigour. Use when user says "run an experiment", "design an A/B +test", "test this feature", "interpret these results", "was this experiment +successful", or "what sample size do I need". +metadata: + author: Mohit Aggarwal + version: 1.0.0 + category: data-and-metrics + tags: [experimentation, data, analytics, ab-testing] + documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills +--- +# Experiment Designer Skill + +## Purpose +Produce rigorous experiment designs from product hypotheses, and interpret +results with statistical and practical significance — so you can defend every +decision to a sceptical engineering lead or data scientist. + +## Two-Phase Process + +### Phase 1: Experiment Design +**Required inputs:** hypothesis, primary metric, current baseline, minimum +detectable effect (MDE), available sample size per day. + +**Output:** +- Hypothesis restated as: "If we [change], we expect [metric] to [move by X%] + because [reason]" +- Control and variant definitions +- Primary metric (one only) +- Secondary guardrail metrics (2-3 max) +- Required sample size (calculated from MDE and baseline) +- Estimated run time in days +- Pre-defined success criteria (before the test runs — no moving goalposts) +- Design risk flags: novelty effects, seasonal confounds, multiple testing issues, + network effects, sample ratio mismatch risks + +### Phase 2: Results Interpretation +**Required inputs:** control results, variant results, p-value or raw numbers, +run duration, any anomalies observed. + +**Output:** +- Statistical significance assessment (p < 0.05 threshold) +- Practical significance: was the lift meaningful for the business, not just real? +- Confidence interval interpretation +- Confounding factors to investigate +- Recommendation: Ship / Iterate / Kill / Run follow-up test +- If "Iterate": specific hypotheses to test next + +## Quality Checks +- Never interpret results from an underpowered test without flagging it +- Always distinguish statistical from practical significance +- Flag if test was stopped early (peeking problem) +- Note if sample ratio mismatch occurred diff --git a/skills/multi-source-signal-synthesiser/SKILL.md b/skills/multi-source-signal-synthesiser/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..105676b --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/multi-source-signal-synthesiser/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +--- +name: multi-source-signal-synthesiser +description: Synthesises user signals from multiple research sources into a +unified insight brief, reconciling conflicting feedback. Use when user has data +from multiple sources, needs to "make sense of all this user data", "what are +users really telling us", "synthesise our research", or has conflicting feedback +from different channels. +metadata: + author: Mohit Aggarwal + version: 1.0.0 + category: discovery + tags: [user-research, synthesis, discovery, insights] + documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills +--- +# Multi-Source Signal Synthesiser Skill + +## Purpose +Reconcile user signals from multiple sources — interviews, support tickets, NPS, +app reviews, sales calls — into a unified, weighted insight brief that surfaces +the underlying need rather than the surface-level request. + +## Source Weighting (default — adapt to your context) +- Direct research (interviews, usability tests): weight 5 +- Support tickets (unprompted pain signals): weight 4 +- NPS verbatims: weight 3 +- App store reviews: weight 2 +- Sales call summaries (filtered through sales lens): weight 2 +- Anecdote or single report: weight 1 + +## Process +1. Accept inputs from any combination of the source types above +2. Tag each signal by source and apply weight +3. Look for CONVERGENCE: same underlying need appearing across 3+ sources +4. Look for DIVERGENCE: contradictory signals suggesting user segmentation +5. Distinguish surface request from underlying need + (e.g. "faster export" may mean "I don't trust the data will be there when + I need it") +6. Produce ranked insights by weighted frequency + +## Output Format + +### User Signal Synthesis — [Date / Period] +**Sources included:** [list] +**Total signals processed:** [n] + +#### Insight 1: [Underlying need, not feature request] +- **Confidence:** High / Medium / Low (based on source diversity and weight) +- **Evidence:** [Signals from each source supporting this] +- **Conflicting signals:** [Any contradicting evidence and how to interpret it] +- **Product implication:** [Specific, not generic] + +[Repeat for top 3-5 insights] + +#### Divergent Signals (Possible Segmentation) +[Where user groups appear to have genuinely different needs] + +#### What the Data Does NOT Tell Us +[Gaps that require further research before acting] + +## OpenClaw Configuration +Connect to: Notion (research docs), support inbox, NPS tool, app review feed. +Schedule: weekly synthesis run, diff output showing new signals only. diff --git a/skills/stakeholder-influence-mapper/SKILL.md b/skills/stakeholder-influence-mapper/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..37cd5c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/stakeholder-influence-mapper/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +--- +name: stakeholder-influence-mapper +description: Maps stakeholders for a product decision and produces a tailored +influence strategy with draft talking points. Use when user needs to "get +alignment", "build consensus", "get buy-in from engineering or finance or legal", +"present to stakeholders", or "navigate organisational resistance". +metadata: + author: Mohit Aggarwal + version: 1.0.0 + category: stakeholder-communication + tags: [stakeholders, influence, communication, alignment] + documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills +--- +# Stakeholder Influence Mapper Skill + +## Purpose +Turn a product initiative into a structured influence plan — who needs to be +aligned, in what order, and exactly what to say to each person in their language. + +## Required Inputs +- Initiative description (what you want to do and why) +- List of key stakeholders involved (name, role, relationship to initiative) +- Timeline pressure (when do you need a decision?) +- Any known objections or political context + +## Process +1. Build stakeholder map with: role, primary concern, decision authority + (blocker / influencer / informed), current stance (supportive / neutral / + resistant / unknown) +2. Identify the critical path of conversations — who must be won before others +3. For each stakeholder, lead with their concern, not your ask +4. Prepare one likely objection per stakeholder and a prepared response +5. Flag any stakeholders who should NOT be approached until others are aligned + +## Output Format + +### Stakeholder Map: [Initiative Name] + +| Stakeholder | Role | Primary Concern | Authority | Current Stance | +|-------------|------|-----------------|-----------|----------------| +| [name] | [role] | [concern] | [type] | [stance] | + +### Recommended Conversation Sequence +1. **[Name first]** — because [reason they unlock others] +2. **[Name second]** — once [first] is aligned +[continue...] + +### Talking Points by Stakeholder + +#### [Stakeholder Name] +**Lead with:** [Their concern, not your feature] +**Your ask:** [One specific thing you need from them] +**Likely objection:** [What they'll push back on] +**Prepared response:** [How to address it without being defensive] +**What success looks like:** [What alignment from them looks like] + +## Notes +- Never send the same message to all stakeholders — calibrate every time +- Engineering leads want technical feasibility acknowledged first +- Finance stakeholders want ROI framing before anything else +- Legal/compliance stakeholders want risk mitigation addressed upfront diff --git a/skills/strategic-narrative-generator/SKILL.md b/skills/strategic-narrative-generator/SKILL.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..870da83 --- /dev/null +++ b/skills/strategic-narrative-generator/SKILL.md @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +--- +name: strategic-narrative-generator +description: Generates the strategic story connecting your roadmap to company +goals in a form non-technical stakeholders can repeat. Use when user needs to +"explain the roadmap", "present strategy to leadership or the board", "write the +why behind the roadmap", "create a narrative for all-hands", or "make the +roadmap tell a story". +metadata: + author: Mohit Aggarwal + version: 1.0.0 + category: roadmapping + tags: [strategy, roadmap, executive-communication, narrative] + documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills +--- +# Strategic Narrative Generator Skill + +## Purpose +Turn a prioritised initiative list into a strategic narrative — the story that +explains not just what you're building but why, why now, and why this sequence. +The kind of narrative a board member can repeat back correctly after one hearing. + +## Required Inputs +- Prioritised initiative list (with rough timelines) +- Current OKRs or strategic priorities (1-3) +- Competitive or market context (optional but improves output significantly) + +## Process +1. Read the initiative list and identify 2-3 natural strategic themes +2. For each theme: articulate the problem it addresses, the customer it serves, + and the metric it moves +3. Build the progression narrative: how does Q1 set up Q2? How does H1 set up H2? +4. Write executive summary in under 100 words (the version someone can repeat) +5. Anticipate the 3 hardest questions a sceptical board member would ask — + and draft answers +6. Identify what's NOT on the roadmap and why (this builds credibility) + +## Output Format + +### Product Strategy Narrative: [Period] + +**The One-Paragraph Context:** +[Market moment + key challenge + our response — for the CFO, not the engineer] + +**Strategic Theme 1: [Name]** +- The problem: [customer pain in plain language] +- Our response: [initiatives in this theme] +- The metric it moves: [specific and measurable] +- Why now: [timing rationale] + +**Strategic Theme 2: [Name]** +[Same structure] + +**The Progression Story:** +[How each quarter sets up the next — this is the narrative arc] + +**Executive Summary (under 100 words — shareable):** +[Version someone can quote at a board meeting] + +**Questions to Prepare For:** +1. [Hard question] → [Prepared answer] +2. [Hard question] → [Prepared answer] +3. [Hard question] → [Prepared answer] + +**What's Not on the Roadmap (and Why):** +[2-3 items — shows strategic discipline, not just prioritisation] + +## Tone Rules +- Write for a CFO, not an engineer +- Lead with outcomes, not features +- Every sentence should answer "so what?" +- Avoid jargon — if you can't say it plainly, the strategy isn't clear enough yet