Update README.md

New Skill: strategic-narrative-generator

.github/FUNDING.yml

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+# These are supported funding model platforms
+
+github: # Replace with up to 4 GitHub Sponsors-enabled usernames e.g., [user1, user2]
+patreon: # Replace with a single Patreon username
+open_collective: # Replace with a single Open Collective username
+ko_fi: # Replace with a single Ko-fi username
+tidelift: # Replace with a single Tidelift platform-name/package-name e.g., npm/babel
+community_bridge: # Replace with a single Community Bridge project-name e.g., cloud-foundry
+liberapay: # Replace with a single Liberapay username
+issuehunt: # Replace with a single IssueHunt username
+lfx_crowdfunding: # Replace with a single LFX Crowdfunding project-name e.g., cloud-foundry
+polar: # Replace with a single Polar username
+buy_me_a_coffee: mohit15856
+thanks_dev: # Replace with a single thanks.dev username
+custom: # Replace with up to 4 custom sponsorship URLs e.g., ['link1', 'link2']

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 my widely-read Medium article ["Claude Skills: The AI Feature That's Quietly Changing How Product Managers Work"](https://medium.com/product-powerhouse/claude-skills-the-ai-feature-thats-quietly-changing-how-product-managers-work-aad5d8d0640a), where I documented how Skills transformed my daily PM workflow, saving 3-4 hours per week.
+
+> 📖 **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?
 
@@ -44,13 +52,64 @@ That's it! Claude now knows your PRD format.
 | **User Research Synthesis** | Analyze and synthesize research findings | 2-3 hrs/study | [View](skills/user-research-synthesis) |
 | **Competitive Analysis** | Structured competitive assessments | 1-2 hrs/analysis | [View](skills/competitive-analysis) |
 
-### Coming Soon 🔜
+### Discovery & User Research
+| **User Interview Synthesis** | Synthesise transcripts into structured findings | Notion | [View](skills/user-interview-synthesis) |
+| **Assumption Mapper** | Risk-rate hidden assumptions in any PRD | Miro | [View](skills/assumption-mapper) |
+
+### Roadmapping & Prioritisation
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **RICE Prioritisation** | Score and rank initiatives objectively | Jira | [View](skills/rice-prioritisation) |
+| **Roadmap Narrative** | Turn ranked lists into strategic narratives | Notion, Miro | [View](skills/roadmap-narrative) |
+| **RICE + Impact Matrix** | RICE scoring + strategic alignment combined | Miro, Jira | [View](skills/rice-impact-matrix) |
+
+### Sprint & Delivery
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **Sprint Brief** | Generate sprint briefs from Jira data | Jira, Slack | [View](skills/sprint-brief) |
+| **Retro Analysis** | Data-grounded retrospective briefs | Jira, Miro | [View](skills/retro-analysis) |
+
+### Data & Metrics
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **Product Health Analysis** | Interpret metrics and surface signals | Analytics | [View](skills/product-health-analysis) |
+
+### Strategy & Competitive Intel
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **Competitor Signal Tracker** | Analyse competitor moves strategically | Notion | [View](skills/competitor-signal-tracker) |
+
+### Stakeholder Communication
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **PRD Template** | Standardized product requirements | — | [View](skills/prd-template) |
+| **Meeting Notes** | Structured meeting documentation | — | [View](skills/meeting-notes) |
+| **Stakeholder Update** | Executive status updates | — | [View](skills/stakeholder-update) |
+| **Executive Update** | Sharp executive briefings | Slack, Teams | [View](skills/executive-update) |
+
+### Go-to-Market & Launch
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **Launch Readiness** | Pre-launch go/no-go assessment | Notion, Jira, Slack | [View](skills/launch-readiness) |
+
+### Cross-functional Collaboration
+| Skill | Purpose | Tool | Folder |
+|-------|---------|------|--------|
+| **User Research Synthesis** | Analyze and synthesize research findings | Notion | [View](skills/user-research-synthesis) |
+| **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) |
+
 
-- Data Analysis Standard
-- Roadmap Presentation
-- Quarterly Planning
-- Product Launch Checklist
-- Technical Specification Template
 
 Want a specific Skill? [Request it here](https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/issues/new?template=skill-request.md)
 
@@ -85,7 +144,7 @@ Want a specific Skill? [Request it here](https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-cla
 
 ### Method 2: Clone the Repo
 
-```bash
+bash
 # Clone the repository
 git clone https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills.git
 cd pm-claude-skills
@@ -96,7 +155,7 @@ zip -r ../../prd-template.skill .
 cd ../..
 
 # Now upload prd-template.skill to Claude
-```
+
 
 ### Method 3: Direct Download (When Available)
 
@@ -190,6 +249,7 @@ A: Yes! MIT license allows commercial use.
 - 📝 [Original Medium Article](https://medium.com/product-powerhouse/claude-skills-the-ai-feature-thats-quietly-changing-how-product-managers-work-aad5d8d0640a)
 - 💼 [Connect on LinkedIn](www.linkedin.com/in/mohitaggarwal4)
 - ✉️ [Email me](mailto:mohit15856@gmail.com)
+- Writing these up and refining them took a fair few evenings. If they saved you some time, a [coffee](https://buymeacoffee.com/mohit15856) is always appreciated 
 
 ## 🙏 Acknowledgments
 

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.

skills/assumption-mapper/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+---
+name: assumption-mapper
+description: Extract and risk-rate all hidden assumptions in a product brief or PRD
+tool_integration: Miro
+---
+# Assumption Mapping Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Surface and prioritize the untested assumptions embedded in any product plan before development begins.
+
+## Process
+1. Read the provided brief, PRD, or concept description
+2. Extract all 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:
+   - 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
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Assumption Map: [Feature/Product Name]
+| Assumption | Category | Confidence | Impact | Priority Score | Recommended Validation |
+|------------|----------|------------|--------|----------------|----------------------|
+| [assumption] | [type] | [1-5] | [1-5] | [score] | [method] |
+
+#### Top 3 Assumptions to Validate First
+[Detailed recommendations for highest-priority items]
+
+## 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

skills/competitive-intelligence-monitor/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+---
+name: competitive-intelligence-monitor
+description: Continuously monitors competitor signals and surfaces strategic 
+implications for your roadmap. Use when user asks to "monitor competitors", 
+"track competitive landscape", "what are competitors doing this week", 
+"competitive briefing", or "what has changed in the market".
+metadata:
+  author: Mohit Aggarwal
+  version: 1.0.0
+  category: strategy
+  tags: [strategy, competitive-intel, roadmapping]
+  documentation: https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills
+---
+# Competitive Intelligence Monitor Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Turn scattered competitor updates into structured weekly intelligence — not just 
+"what they did" but "what changed since last week and what it means for us."
+
+## Signal Categories to Monitor
+- **Product signals:** New features, removals, UX changes, beta programmes
+- **Pricing signals:** Changes to tiers, free limits, enterprise terms
+- **Hiring signals:** Job postings revealing strategic bets
+- **Partnership signals:** Integrations, acquisitions, ecosystem moves
+- **Messaging signals:** Changes in positioning, audience, value proposition
+
+## Process
+
+### First Run (Full Report)
+1. For each competitor provided, scan all five signal categories
+2. Categorise each signal found
+3. Assess: reactive (responding to market) or proactive (setting direction)?
+4. Rate threat level: High / Medium / Low / Watch
+5. Connect each signal to a specific item on the provided roadmap
+6. Recommend response: Accelerate / Deprioritise / Monitor / Investigate
+
+### Subsequent Runs (Diff Only)
+1. Compare current signals against previous run summary
+2. Output ONLY what is new or changed since last run
+3. Flag if a previously Low signal has escalated to High
+4. Keep output under 300 words — brevity is the point
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Competitive Intelligence Brief — [Date]
+**New Since Last Run:** [n signals]
+
+#### 🔴 High Priority
+**[Competitor]:** [Signal] → [Implication] → [Recommended action + owner]
+
+#### 🟡 Watch
+**[Competitor]:** [Signal] → [Why it matters now]
+
+#### ✅ No Change
+[Competitors with no new signals this week]
+
+**This Week's Strategic Summary:**
+[2 sentences max — what is the overall competitive landscape doing?]
+
+## OpenClaw Configuration
+Add to YAML frontmatter for scheduled runs:
+`schedule: weekly-monday-0800`
+Persistent memory stores last run summary for diff comparison.

skills/competitor-signal-tracker/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+name: competitor-signal-tracker
+description: Analyse competitor moves and surface strategic implications for your product
+tool_integration: Notion
+---
+# Competitor Signal Tracker Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Turn scattered competitor information into structured strategic intelligence — not just "what they did" but "what it means for us."
+
+## Signal Categories to Track
+- **Product signals:** New features, removals, UX changes, beta programmes
+- **Pricing signals:** Changes to tiers, free limits, enterprise terms
+- **Hiring signals:** Job postings that reveal strategic bets (e.g., hiring ML engineers = AI investment)
+- **Partnership signals:** Integrations, acquisitions, ecosystem moves
+- **Messaging signals:** Changes in positioning, target audience, value proposition
+
+## Process
+1. For each competitor update provided, categorise the signal type
+2. Assess: Is this reactive (responding to market) or proactive (setting direction)?
+3. Rate strategic threat level: High / Medium / Low / Watch
+4. Connect to your roadmap: does this accelerate, validate, or challenge any of your bets?
+5. Recommend a response: Accelerate existing initiative / Deprioritise / Monitor / Investigate further
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Competitive Intelligence Report — [Date]
+
+#### [Competitor Name]
+**Signal:** [What they did]
+**Signal Type:** [Product / Pricing / Hiring / Partnership / Messaging]
+**Reactive or Proactive:** [assessment]
+**Threat Level:** [High / Medium / Low / Watch]
+**Implication for Us:** [Specific connection to our roadmap or strategy]
+**Recommended Response:** [Action + owner + timeline]
+
+#### Strategic Summary
+[2-3 sentences on the overall competitive landscape shift this week/month]

skills/design-handoff-brief/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+---
+name: design-handoff-brief
+description: Transform feature briefs into structured design briefs that give designers the context they need
+tool_integration: Figma, Notion
+---
+# Design Handoff Brief Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Produce a design brief that sets designers up for success — grounding them in user context and constraints before they open Figma, not after they've gone in the wrong direction.
+
+## What Designers Actually Need (and PMs Often Skip)
+- The user's goal, not the feature name
+- The emotional state of the user at this moment in the journey
+- What success looks like — how will we know the design worked?
+- Constraints: technical, legal, brand, accessibility
+- Edge cases that must be handled
+- What we're explicitly NOT solving for
+
+## Process
+1. Read the feature brief or PRD provided
+2. Extract user goal (reframe from feature language to user outcome language)
+3. Identify constraints — technical limitations, brand guidelines, accessibility requirements
+4. List edge cases the design must handle
+5. Define success criteria the design should be evaluated against
+6. Write a "not in scope" section to prevent scope creep in design
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Design Brief: [Feature Name]
+
+**User Goal:** (in the user's words, not ours)
+"When I [situation], I want to [motivation] so that I can [outcome]."
+
+**Context & Emotional State:**
+[Where is the user in their journey? What are they feeling? What just happened?]
+
+**Design Success Criteria:**
+- [Criterion 1 — measurable where possible]
+- [Criterion 2]
+- [Criterion 3]
+
+**Constraints:**
+- Technical: [limitations engineering has flagged]
+- Brand: [relevant brand guidelines]
+- Accessibility: [WCAG level required, any specific requirements]
+- Legal/Compliance: [if applicable]
+
+**Edge Cases to Design For:**
+- [Edge case 1]
+- [Edge case 2]
+- [Edge case 3]
+
+**Explicitly Out of Scope:**
+- [What we are NOT solving in this design iteration]
+
+**Reference Material:**
+- User research: [link]
+- Existing patterns: [Figma component library link]
+- Competitor examples: [links if relevant]

skills/executive-update/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: executive-update
+description: Transform detailed product updates into concise executive briefings
+tool_integration: Slack, Microsoft Teams
+---
+# Executive Update Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Produce a stakeholder update that busy executives will actually read — structured around what they care about: decisions, risks, and numbers.
+
+## Executive Communication Principles
+- Lead with the headline, not the context
+- Every update should answer: "So what does this mean for the business?"
+- Flag decisions needed clearly — don't bury asks in paragraphs
+- Be honest about risks — executives hate surprises more than bad news
+
+## Process
+1. Read the full product update provided
+2. Identify: key metric movements, decisions required, risks to flag, wins to celebrate
+3. Write in reverse pyramid style — most important first
+4. Limit to 250 words maximum for the main body
+5. Add a "Decisions Needed" section with clear options and your recommendation
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Product Update — [Date / Sprint / Month]
+**Headline:** [One sentence on the most important thing]
+
+**By the Numbers:**
+- [Metric 1]: [value] ([vs. target / last period])
+- [Metric 2]: [value] ([vs. target / last period])
+- [Metric 3]: [value] ([vs. target / last period])
+
+**Progress This Period:**
+[3-4 bullet points, outcome-focused not activity-focused]
+
+**Risks & Watch Items:**
+[2-3 bullets — be direct, include mitigation]
+
+**Decisions Needed:**
+1. [Decision] — Options: [A] or [B] — Recommendation: [your view] — Needed by: [date]
+
+**What's Next:**
+[2-3 bullets on next period priorities]

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

skills/launch-readiness/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+name: launch-readiness
+description: Run a comprehensive pre-launch readiness assessment across all functions
+tool_integration: Notion, Jira, Slack
+---
+# Launch Readiness Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Ensure nothing falls through the cracks before launch by systematically checking readiness across every function — and producing a clear, evidenced go/no-go recommendation.
+
+## Readiness Checklist by Function
+
+### Product & Engineering
+- [ ] Feature complete against launch spec
+- [ ] Performance benchmarks met
+- [ ] Accessibility standards checked
+- [ ] Edge cases documented and handled
+- [ ] Rollback plan defined
+
+### Marketing & Comms
+- [ ] Launch messaging approved
+- [ ] Blog post / press release drafted
+- [ ] Social content prepared
+- [ ] Email campaigns scheduled
+- [ ] Landing page live and tested
+
+### Support & Success
+- [ ] Support team trained on new feature
+- [ ] FAQ and help docs published
+- [ ] Escalation path defined for launch issues
+- [ ] Customer success briefed (if enterprise)
+
+### Sales & Partnerships
+- [ ] Sales enablement materials ready
+- [ ] Pricing confirmed and communicated
+- [ ] Partner comms sent (if applicable)
+
+### Data & Analytics
+- [ ] Tracking events implemented and verified
+- [ ] Launch metrics dashboard live
+- [ ] Baseline metrics captured pre-launch
+
+## Process
+1. Review provided launch brief and checklist responses
+2. Flag any incomplete items as blockers (must fix) or risks (monitor)
+3. Assess overall readiness and produce go/no-go recommendation with rationale
+4. If no-go, specify exactly what must be completed and by when
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Launch Readiness Assessment: [Feature/Product Name]
+**Launch Date:** [date]
+**Overall Status:** ✅ Go / ⚠️ Conditional Go / 🛑 No-Go
+
+**Blockers (must resolve before launch):**
+- [item + owner + resolution required by]
+
+**Risks (monitor closely):**
+- [item + mitigation plan]
+
+**Ready Areas:**
+- [function]: ✅ Ready
+
+**Recommendation:**
+[Clear go/no-go with rationale — 3-5 sentences]

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.

skills/product-health-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+name: product-health-analysis
+description: Interpret product metrics against goals and surface actionable signals
+tool_integration: Google Analytics, Mixpanel
+---
+# Product Health Dashboard Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Transform raw metrics data into a clear health narrative — what's working, what's not, and what needs immediate attention.
+
+## Metrics Framework
+Analyse across four layers:
+1. **Acquisition** — new users, source quality, CAC trends
+2. **Activation** — time to first value, onboarding completion rates
+3. **Engagement** — DAU/MAU, feature adoption, session depth
+4. **Retention** — D1/D7/D30 retention, churn rate, resurrection rate
+
+## Process
+1. For each metric, compare: current period vs. previous period, current vs. target
+2. Flag anything more than 10% off target as requiring investigation
+3. Look for correlations — does a drop in activation explain a retention dip 2 weeks later?
+4. Write a plain-English health summary (no jargon) suitable for sharing with non-data stakeholders
+5. Recommend top 3 areas for immediate investigation with suggested diagnostic steps
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Product Health Report — [Period]
+**Overall Health:** 🟢 On Track / 🟡 Watch / 🔴 Action Required
+
+| Metric | Current | Target | vs. Last Period | Status |
+|--------|---------|--------|-----------------|--------|
+| [metric] | [value] | [target] | [+/-%] | [🟢/🟡/🔴] |
+
+**Key Observations:**
+[3-5 bullet observations written in plain English]
+
+**Areas Requiring Investigation:**
+1. [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
+2. [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
+3. [Metric + hypothesis + suggested diagnostic]
+
+**Recommended Actions:**
+[Specific next steps with owners and timelines]

skills/retro-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+name: retro-analysis
+description: Analyse sprint delivery data and produce a structured retrospective brief
+tool_integration: Jira, Miro
+---
+# Retrospective Analysis Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Generate a data-grounded retrospective brief that separates facts from feelings, so the team spends retro time on solutions rather than debating what happened.
+
+## Required Inputs
+- Sprint tickets: planned vs. completed
+- Carry-over tickets and reasons
+- Tickets reopened after closing
+- Any incidents or unplanned work
+- Sprint velocity vs. historical average
+
+## Process
+1. Calculate: completion rate, carry-over rate, unplanned work percentage
+2. Identify patterns: which ticket types were most likely to carry over? Which caused blockers?
+3. Note any process or communication breakdowns visible in the data
+4. Prepare 3 "Start / Stop / Continue" prompts based on the data — not generic, specific to this sprint
+5. Suggest 1 concrete experiment for the next sprint based on the biggest friction point
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Sprint [Number] Retrospective Brief
+
+**By the Numbers:**
+- Planned: [n] tickets | Completed: [n] | Carry-over: [n] | Completion rate: [%]
+- Unplanned work: [n] tickets ([%] of capacity)
+- Velocity: [points] vs. [average] average
+
+**What the Data Suggests:**
+[2-3 observations grounded in the numbers above]
+
+**Discussion Prompts:**
+- Start: [specific prompt]
+- Stop: [specific prompt]
+- Continue: [specific prompt]
+
+**Suggested Experiment for Next Sprint:**
+[One concrete, testable process change]

skills/rice-impact-matrix/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+name: rice-impact-matrix
+description: Score features using RICE and plot against strategic alignment for nuanced prioritisation
+tool_integration: Miro, Jira
+---
+# RICE + Strategic Alignment Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Produce a prioritisation output that balances quantitative RICE scoring with qualitative strategic fit — because the highest RICE score isn't always the right next bet.
+
+## Two-Stage Process
+
+### Stage 1: RICE Scoring
+- Reach: Users affected per quarter
+- Impact: 3/2/1/0.5/0.25 scale
+- Confidence: 100% / 80% / 50%
+- Effort: Person-months
+- RICE = (R × I × C) / E
+
+### Stage 2: Strategic Alignment Score
+Rate each initiative against your current strategic priorities (provide these as input):
+- Directly supports top OKR: +3
+- Supports secondary OKR: +2
+- Neutral: +1
+- Contradicts strategic direction: -1
+
+### Final Priority Score
+Combined Score = RICE Score + (Strategic Alignment × 10)
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Priority Matrix — [Quarter]
+| Initiative | RICE Score | Strategic Alignment | Combined Score | Quadrant | Recommendation |
+|------------|------------|--------------------|--------------------|----------|----------------|
+| [name] | [score] | [score] | [combined] | [Now/Next/Later/Drop] | [action] |
+
+#### Quadrant Definitions
+- **Now:** High RICE + High Strategic Alignment → Build this quarter
+- **Next:** High RICE + Lower Alignment → Queue for next quarter
+- **Later:** Lower RICE + High Alignment → Revisit when capacity allows
+- **Drop:** Low RICE + Low Alignment → Remove from backlog
+
+#### Recommendations
+[Top 5 initiatives with rationale for sequencing]

skills/rice-prioritisation/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+name: rice-prioritisation
+description: Score and rank product initiatives using the RICE framework
+tool_integration: Jira
+---
+# RICE Prioritisation Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Apply consistent, criteria-based RICE scoring to a list of features or initiatives to produce an objective prioritisation ranking.
+
+## RICE Definitions (adapt to your context)
+- **Reach:** Number of users affected per quarter (use actual DAU/MAU data where available)
+- **Impact:** Effect on your primary metric — use scale: 3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal
+- **Confidence:** How certain are we about R and I estimates? 100%=high, 80%=medium, 50%=low
+- **Effort:** Person-months required across all functions
+
+## RICE Formula
+RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort
+
+## Process
+1. For each initiative provided, gather or estimate R, I, C, E values
+2. Flag where estimates are weak and note what data would improve them
+3. Calculate RICE score for each
+4. Rank highest to lowest
+5. Flag any "quick wins" (high RICE score, low effort) and "moonshots" (high impact, high effort)
+6. Note dependencies between items that affect sequencing
+
+## Output Format
+
+### RICE Prioritisation: [Backlog/Quarter]
+| Initiative | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort | RICE Score | Notes |
+|------------|-------|--------|------------|--------|------------|-------|
+| [name] | [n] | [score] | [%] | [months] | [score] | [flags] |
+
+#### Recommended Sequence
+[Top 5 initiatives with rationale]
+
+#### Data Gaps to Address
+[What information would most improve scoring accuracy]

skills/roadmap-narrative/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+---
+name: roadmap-narrative
+description: Transform a prioritised initiative list into a compelling strategic roadmap narrative
+tool_integration: Notion, Miro
+---
+# Roadmap Narrative Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Convert a ranked list of product initiatives into a clear, strategic narrative that connects individual items to company goals and communicates a coherent product direction.
+
+## Process
+1. Review the prioritised initiative list and company OKRs provided
+2. Identify 2-3 strategic themes that group the initiatives naturally
+3. For each theme, articulate: the problem it addresses, the customer it serves, the metric it moves
+4. Write a quarter-level narrative that shows progression — how does H1 set up H2?
+5. Draft an executive summary (3-4 sentences max) that non-technical stakeholders can repeat
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Product Roadmap: [Quarter/Half/Year]
+**Strategic Context:** [1 paragraph: market moment, key challenge, our response]
+
+#### Theme 1: [Theme Name]
+- Strategic rationale
+- Initiatives included
+- Primary metric impacted
+- Dependencies
+
+[Repeat for each theme]
+
+**Executive Summary (shareable):**
+[3-4 sentences that could be shared in an all-hands or board update]
+
+## Tone Guidelines
+- Avoid jargon — write for a CFO, not an engineer
+- Lead with customer outcomes, not features
+- Be honest about what's NOT on the roadmap and why

skills/sprint-brief/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+name: sprint-brief
+description: Generate a structured sprint brief from Jira sprint data and goals
+tool_integration: Jira, Slack
+---
+# Sprint Brief Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Produce a clear, scannable sprint brief that every team member — engineer, designer, PM — can read in under three minutes and understand exactly what we're doing and why.
+
+## Required Inputs
+- Sprint name and number
+- Sprint goal (1-2 sentences)
+- Ticket list with owners
+- Known dependencies or blockers
+- Carry-over items from previous sprint
+
+## Process
+1. Read sprint goal and check it's specific and measurable — flag if it's too vague
+2. Group tickets by theme or feature area
+3. Identify the critical path — which tickets must complete for the sprint goal to be met?
+4. Flag risks: tickets with unclear acceptance criteria, missing designs, unresolved dependencies
+5. Note carry-over items and whether they affect this sprint's goal
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Sprint [Number] Brief — [Dates]
+**Sprint Goal:** [1-2 sentences]
+**Why This Sprint Matters:** [Connect to quarterly OKR in 2-3 sentences]
+
+**What We're Building:**
+- [Theme 1]: [tickets and owners]
+- [Theme 2]: [tickets and owners]
+
+**Critical Path:** [The 2-3 tickets everything else depends on]
+
+**Risks to Flag:**
+- [Risk 1 + mitigation]
+- [Risk 2 + mitigation]
+
+**Carry-over from Last Sprint:** [List + impact on current goal]
+
+**Definition of Done:** [Specific, agreed criteria for sprint success]

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

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

skills/user-interview-synthesis/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+---
+name: user-interview-synthesis
+description: Synthesise user interview transcripts into structured research findings
+tool_integration: Notion
+---
+# User Interview Synthesis Skill
+
+## Purpose
+Transform raw interview transcripts into a structured synthesis document that surfaces themes, pain points, and actionable insights.
+
+## Process
+1. Read all provided transcripts fully before drawing conclusions
+2. Identify recurring themes (minimum 3 mentions to qualify as a theme)
+3. Categorize findings into: Pain Points, Workflow Insights, Feature Requests, Delight Moments
+4. Select 2-3 verbatim quotes per theme that best represent the pattern
+5. Draft "So What" implications for each theme — what does this mean for the product?
+
+## Output Format
+
+### Research Synthesis: [Study Name]
+**Participants:** [n]
+**Date Range:** [dates]
+**Research Questions:** [list]
+
+#### Theme 1: [Theme Name]
+- Summary (2-3 sentences)
+- Supporting quotes
+- Implication for product
+
+[Repeat for each theme]
+
+#### Recommended Next Steps
+[Specific, actionable recommendations based on findings]
+
+## Quality Checks
+- Every theme must be supported by quotes from at least 3 participants
+- Implications must connect to product decisions, not just observations
+- Avoid researcher bias — let the data lead