mcpbeat Sign in

Prd Writer Agent Skill

Product Requirements Document writing - PRD templates, MoSCoW prioritization, user personas, competitive analysis, feature specs, acceptance criteria, risk assessment

3k tokens
context cost
the whole folder, loaded on every use
1
files
instructions only
0
copies elsewhere
how many repositories repackaged it
521
stars on the repo
on the repository, not the skill itself

Install

one command, takes just this skill from the repository
npx skills add https://github.com/vibeeval/vibecosystem --skill prd-writer

The instruction itself

18 sections, as written by the author

PRD Writer

PRD Template

# Product Requirements Document

## Meta
| Field | Value |
|-------|-------|
| Product | [urun adi] |
| Author | [yazar] |
| Version | [v1.0] |
| Status | [Draft / In Review / Approved] |
| Last Updated | [tarih] |
| Stakeholders | [paydas listesi] |

---

## 1. Problem Statement

### The Problem
[Kullanicilarin yasadigi sorunu 2-3 cumle ile acikla]

### Who is Affected
[Etkilenen kullanici segmenti ve buyuklugu]

### Current Solutions
[Mevcut cozumler ve neden yetersiz oldugu]

### Evidence
- [Veri noktasi 1: kullanici arastirmasi, anket, metrik]
- [Veri noktasi 2]
- [Veri noktasi 3]

---

## 2. Goals & Success Metrics

### Goals
| Goal | Description | Metric | Target |
|------|-------------|--------|--------|
| G1 | [birincil hedef] | [olcum] | [hedef deger] |
| G2 | [ikincil hedef] | [olcum] | [hedef deger] |

### Non-Goals (Out of Scope)
- [Bu PRD kapsaminda OLMAYAN seyler]
- [Gelecek iterasyona birakilanlar]

### Success Metrics
| Metric | Current | Target | Measurement |
|--------|---------|--------|-------------|
| [KPI 1] | [mevcut] | [hedef] | [nasil olculecek] |
| [KPI 2] | [mevcut] | [hedef] | [nasil olculecek] |

---

## 3. User Personas

[Asagidaki Persona Template'i kullan]

---

## 4. User Stories

[Epic → Story → Acceptance Criteria hiyerarsisi]

---

## 5. Requirements

### Functional Requirements

| ID | Requirement | Priority | Notes |
|----|------------|----------|-------|
| FR-1 | [gereksinim] | Must | [detay] |
| FR-2 | [gereksinim] | Should | [detay] |

### Non-Functional Requirements

| ID | Category | Requirement | Target |
|----|----------|------------|--------|
| NFR-1 | Performance | Page load time | < 2s |
| NFR-2 | Scalability | Concurrent users | 10,000 |
| NFR-3 | Availability | Uptime SLA | 99.9% |
| NFR-4 | Security | Data encryption | AES-256 |

---

## 6. Design & UX

### User Flows
[Temel kullanici akislari - diyagram veya adim listesi]

### Wireframes
[Link veya embed]

### Edge Cases
| Scenario | Expected Behavior |
|----------|-------------------|
| [durum 1] | [beklenen davranis] |
| [durum 2] | [beklenen davranis] |

---

## 7. Technical Considerations

### Architecture
[Mimari yaklasim ve entegrasyonlar]

### Dependencies
| Dependency | Type | Risk | Mitigation |
|-----------|------|------|------------|
| [dep 1] | External API | Medium | Fallback mechanism |
| [dep 2] | Internal service | Low | Already available |

### Migration / Backward Compatibility
[Mevcut sistemle uyumluluk plani]

---

## 8. Timeline & Milestones

| Phase | Milestone | Duration | Target Date |
|-------|-----------|----------|-------------|
| Phase 1 | MVP | [sure] | [tarih] |
| Phase 2 | Beta | [sure] | [tarih] |
| Phase 3 | GA | [sure] | [tarih] |

---

## 9. Risks & Mitigations

[Asagidaki Risk Assessment framework'unu kullan]

---

## 10. Open Questions

| # | Question | Owner | Status |
|---|----------|-------|--------|
| 1 | [soru] | [kisi] | Open |
| 2 | [soru] | [kisi] | Resolved: [cevap] |

MoSCoW Prioritization

Framework

| Category | Definition | Guideline |

|----------|-----------|-----------|

| Must | Critical, non-negotiable | Launch blocker - no release without it |

| Should | Important but not critical | Expected by users, can workaround temporarily |

| Could | Nice to have | Enhances experience, not core |

| Won't | Out of scope (this iteration) | Documented for future consideration |

Prioritization Matrix

## Feature Prioritization

| Feature | Impact (1-5) | Effort (1-5) | Risk (1-5) | Priority |
|---------|-------------|-------------|-----------|----------|
| [F1] | 5 | 2 | 1 | Must |
| [F2] | 4 | 3 | 2 | Should |
| [F3] | 3 | 4 | 3 | Could |
| [F4] | 2 | 5 | 4 | Won't |

### Scoring Rules
- Impact: Business/user value (5 = critical)
- Effort: Dev time and complexity (5 = very hard)
- Risk: Technical/business uncertainty (5 = very risky)
- Priority = High Impact + Low Effort + Low Risk = Must

User Persona Template

## Persona: [Isim]

**Photo:** [placeholder]
**Role:** [is unvani / kullanici tipi]
**Age:** [yas araligi]
**Tech Savvy:** [Low / Medium / High]

### Background
[2-3 cumle: kim, ne yapiyor, nerede calisiyor]

### Goals
1. [birincil hedef - isini kolaylastiran]
2. [ikincil hedef - uzun vadeli]
3. [ucuncul hedef - kisilsel]

### Pain Points
1. [en buyuk sorun - gunluk frustration]
2. [ikinci sorun]
3. [ucuncu sorun]

### Behaviors
- [nasil bilgi arar]
- [hangi araclari kullanir]
- [ne siklikta etkilesin]

### Motivations
- [ne motive eder]
- [ne icin para oder]

### Quote
> "[Persona'nin tipik bir sozu - empati kurmak icin]"

### Scenario
[Tipik bir gun: urunu ne zaman, nasil, neden kullanir]

Persona Anti-Patterns

| Anti-Pattern | Neden Yanlis | Dogru Yol |

|-------------|-------------|-----------|

| Too many personas (5+) | Odak kaybeder | 2-3 primary persona |

| Vague demographics only | Actionable degil | Behavior + motivation ekle |

| No pain points | Cozum odakli olamaz | Gercek kullanici arastirmasindan cikar |

| Fictional without data | Yaniltici | Interview/survey veriyle destekle |

Competitive Analysis Framework

## Competitive Analysis

### Market Landscape

| Competitor | Market Share | Target Segment | Pricing |
|-----------|-------------|---------------|---------|
| [rakip 1] | [%] | [segment] | [fiyat modeli] |
| [rakip 2] | [%] | [segment] | [fiyat modeli] |

### Feature Comparison Matrix

| Feature | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B | Competitor C |
|---------|-----|-------------|-------------|-------------|
| [F1] | [planned] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] |
| [F2] | [planned] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] |
| [F3] | [planned] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] | [var/yok] |

### Differentiators
1. [Bizi farkli kilan 1]
2. [Bizi farkli kilan 2]
3. [Bizi farkli kilan 3]

### Competitive Moat
[Neden kopyalanamaz / zorlasilir]

### Gaps & Opportunities
- [Rakiplerin zayif noktasi 1]
- [Rakiplerin zayif noktasi 2]

Feature Specification Format

## Feature: [Ozellik Adi]

**ID:** FEAT-001
**Priority:** Must / Should / Could
**Epic:** [bagli epic]
**Owner:** [sorumluluk]

### Description
[1-2 paragraf: ne yapiyor, neden onemli]

### User Stories
- As a [role], I want [feature], so that [benefit]

### Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Given [precondition], when [action], then [result]
- [ ] Given [precondition], when [action], then [result]

### UI/UX
[Wireframe link veya description]

### Edge Cases
| Case | Behavior |
|------|----------|
| [durum] | [davranis] |

### Technical Notes
[API endpoint, data model, entegrasyon notlari]

### Dependencies
- [Bagimlilik 1]
- [Bagimlilik 2]

### Out of Scope
- [Bu iterasyonda yapilmayacak]

Acceptance Criteria Yazimi

Given-When-Then (BDD) Format

Feature: User Registration

  Scenario: Successful registration with valid data
    Given the user is on the registration page
    And the user has not previously registered
    When the user enters valid email "[email protected]"
    And the user enters a password meeting complexity requirements
    And the user clicks "Register"
    Then a new account should be created
    And a verification email should be sent
    And the user should see a success message

  Scenario: Registration with existing email
    Given the user is on the registration page
    And an account with "[email protected]" already exists
    When the user enters email "[email protected]"
    And the user clicks "Register"
    Then the user should see "Email already in use" error
    And no duplicate account should be created

Acceptance Criteria Checklist

  • [ ] Happy path covered
  • [ ] Error states defined
  • [ ] Edge cases documented
  • [ ] Performance requirements specified
  • [ ] Security requirements included
  • [ ] Accessibility requirements noted
  • [ ] Testable (can be verified objectively)

Anti-Patterns

| Anti-Pattern | Neden Yanlis | Dogru Yol |

|-------------|-------------|-----------|

| "System should be fast" | Olculemez | "Page loads in < 2 seconds" |

| "Should work correctly" | Belirsiz | Specific expected behavior |

| No error scenarios | Incomplete | Define every failure mode |

| Implementation details | Cozumu kisitlar | Focus on behavior, not how |

Risk Assessment

Risk Matrix

## Risk Register

| ID | Risk | Likelihood (1-5) | Impact (1-5) | Score | Mitigation | Owner |
|----|------|-------------------|--------------|-------|------------|-------|
| R1 | [risk] | [L] | [I] | [LxI] | [plan] | [kisi] |
| R2 | [risk] | [L] | [I] | [LxI] | [plan] | [kisi] |

### Risk Categories
- **Technical:** Architecture, integration, performance
- **Resource:** Staffing, skills, availability
- **Schedule:** Dependencies, estimation accuracy
- **Business:** Market changes, stakeholder alignment
- **External:** Third-party, regulatory, competitive

### Risk Response Strategies
- **Avoid:** Change plan to eliminate risk
- **Mitigate:** Reduce likelihood or impact
- **Transfer:** Insurance, outsource, vendor SLA
- **Accept:** Monitor and contingency plan

Timeline & Milestone Planning

Phase Planning Template

## Implementation Phases

### Phase 1: Foundation (Week 1-2)
- [ ] Data model design
- [ ] API scaffolding
- [ ] Auth integration
**Deliverable:** Backend API functional
**Exit Criteria:** API tests passing, deployed to staging

### Phase 2: Core Features (Week 3-5)
- [ ] Feature A implementation
- [ ] Feature B implementation
- [ ] Integration testing
**Deliverable:** Core functionality complete
**Exit Criteria:** All Must requirements met, QA passed

### Phase 3: Polish (Week 6-7)
- [ ] UI/UX refinement
- [ ] Performance optimization
- [ ] Should requirements
**Deliverable:** Beta-ready product
**Exit Criteria:** Beta user feedback positive

### Phase 4: Launch (Week 8)
- [ ] Production deployment
- [ ] Monitoring setup
- [ ] Documentation
**Deliverable:** GA release
**Exit Criteria:** All launch criteria met

PRD Review Checklist

  • [ ] Problem statement is clear and evidence-based
  • [ ] Success metrics are measurable and time-bound
  • [ ] User personas based on real research
  • [ ] Requirements use MoSCoW prioritization
  • [ ] Acceptance criteria are testable
  • [ ] Risks identified with mitigation plans
  • [ ] Timeline is realistic with buffer
  • [ ] Open questions have owners and deadlines
  • [ ] All stakeholders have reviewed and agreed
  • [ ] Non-goals explicitly stated

Other skills for the same job

different authors, same section of the catalogue
Markdown To HTML
by github
vendor ×1

Convert Markdown files to HTML similar to `marked.js`, `pandoc`, `gomarkdown/markdown`, or similar tools; or writing custom script to convert markdown to html and/or working on web template systems like `jekyll/jekyll`, `gohugoio/hugo`, or similar web templating systems that utilize markdown documents, converting them to html. Use when asked to "convert markdown to html", "transform md to html", "render markdown", "generate html from markdown", or when working with .md files and/or web a templating system that converts markdown to HTML output. Supports CLI and Node.js workflows with GFM, CommonMark, and standard Markdown flavors.

29k tokens
Documentation
by anthropics
vendor ×1

Write and maintain technical documentation. Trigger with "write docs for", "document this", "create a README", "write a runbook", "onboarding guide", or when the user needs help with any form of technical writing — API docs, architecture docs, or operational runbooks.

376 tokens
Visa Doc Translate
by mturac
×1

Translate visa application documents (images) to English and create a bilingual PDF with original and translation

1k tokens
Docs Writer
by christophacham
×1

Write, review, and edit documentation files with consistent structure, tone, and technical accuracy. Use when creating docs, reviewing markdown files, writing READMEs, updating `/docs` directories, or when user says "write documentation", "review this doc", "improve this README", "create a guide", or "edit markdown". Do NOT use for code comments, inline JSDoc, or API reference generation.

2k tokens
Constitution Guardian
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Real-time Constitution compliance checker for devflow documents. Blocks partial implementations and hardcoded secrets during file editing.

5k tokens
Global Commenting
by ComeOnOliver
×1

Write self-documenting code with minimal, evergreen comments that explain complex logic without describing recent changes or temporary fixes. Use this skill when writing code comments, documentation strings, explaining complex algorithms, clarifying business logic, or deciding whether code needs comments. Apply when working with any source code files where comments or documentation might be added, ensuring comments remain relevant, helpful, and focused on explaining why rather than what the code does, while preferring clear code structure and naming over excessive commenting.

3k tokens
Hads
by wshobson

Use when writing technical documentation that needs to be readable by both humans and AI models, converting existing docs to HADS format, validating a HADS document, or optimizing documentation for token-efficient AI consumption.

2k tokens
Ic Memo
by anthropics
vendor

Draft a structured investment committee memo for PE deal approval. Synthesizes due diligence findings, financial analysis, and deal terms into a professional IC-ready document. Use when preparing for investment committee, writing up a deal, or creating a formal recommendation. Triggers on "write IC memo", "investment committee memo", "deal write-up", "prepare IC materials", or "recommendation memo".

743 tokens

How to use it

Copy the folder

Take vibeeval/prd-writer from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.

Check the name does not clash

The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.