
prd-v01-problem-framing
by mattgierhart
PRD-driven Context Engineering: A systematic approach to building AI-powered products using progressive documentation and context-aware development workflows
SKILL.md
name: prd-v01-problem-framing description: > Transform vague product ideas into evidence-anchored problem statements for PRD v0.1 Spark. Triggers on starting new products/features, validating market opportunities, drafting PRD Why sections, or requests like "frame the problem", "define pain points", "write problem statement", "start v0.1", "what problem are we solving". Outputs structured problem tables with CFD evidence IDs.
Problem Framing Skill
Transform market signals into evidence-anchored problem statements.
Workflow Overview
- Assess gaps → Identify what evidence is missing
- Anchor evidence → Create CFD-IDs for each pain point
- Extract dimensions → Pull multiple problems from each source
- Quantify costs → Add time/money/risk numbers
- Draft statement → Populate the problem table
Core Output Template
Populate this table for every problem statement:
| Element | Definition | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Who is hurting? | Specific, findable, countable persona | Segment size |
| What pain exists? | Observable behavior or workflow friction | CFD-ID |
| Cost of problem | Time, money, or opportunity lost | Quantified |
| Why now? | Market trigger creating urgency | Trend/event |
| What's impossible? | Opportunity cost—what can't they do | User quote |
See assets/problem-statement.md for copy-paste template.
Step 1: Gap Assessment
Before drafting, create this status table:
| Element | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Who is hurting? | ⚠️ Hypothesis / ✅ Validated / ❌ Missing | |
| What pain exists? | ⚠️ / ✅ / ❌ | |
| Cost of problem | ⚠️ / ✅ / ❌ | |
| Why now? | ⚠️ / ✅ / ❌ | |
| What's impossible? | ⚠️ / ✅ / ❌ |
Gate: Require ≥2 elements ✅ Validated before drafting. If ≥3 elements ❌ Missing, run deep research first. See references/research-prompts.md for research templates.
Step 2: Evidence Anchoring
Create CFD entries for each pain point:
CFD-###
Source: [Platform/Person]
Tier: [1-5]
Quote: "[Verbatim]"
Dimensions: [List problems extracted]
Evidence Tier Hierarchy:
- Tier 1: Buying behavior (invoices, subscriptions, job budgets)
- Tier 2: Active workarounds (spreadsheets, hired help)
- Tier 3: Complaints with cost ("costs me X hours")
- Tier 4: General complaints ("this is annoying")
- Tier 5: Speculation — REJECT
Step 3: Pain Dimension Extraction
Extract multiple problems from each source. One quote often contains 3-4 distinct pain dimensions.
Example: "USB sticks removed for every update, no scheduling, screens don't communicate, priced for 100+ displays" → Sneakernet workflow, No dynamic scheduling, No centralization, Price mismatch
Step 4: Cost Quantification
Every problem needs a number:
| Type | Calculation |
|---|---|
| Time | Hours/week × hourly rate |
| Money | Current spend on workaround |
| Opportunity | Revenue/outcomes missed |
| Risk | Penalty × probability |
Step 5: Draft Problem Statement
Use the core output template. Reference CFD-IDs for every claim.
See references/examples.md for good/bad examples with explanations.
Quality Gates
Pass Checklist
- ≥1 Tier 1-2 evidence item
- Cost quantified (time, money, or risk)
- "Who" specific enough to build prospect list
- "Why now" has at least Tier 3 hypothesis
Testability Check
- Can find 10 people with this problem in 48 hours?
- Can observe the pain behavior?
- Can quantify cost without leading questions?
Anti-Patterns
| Pattern | Example | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Vague "Who" | "Small businesses" | → "SMBs with 1-10 screens" |
| Feature-as-problem | "Need a dashboard" | → "Can't see status" |
| Solution creep | "MVP must solve X" | → Stay on problem (v0.4) |
| Missing cost | "This is annoying" | → "Costs X hrs/week" |
| Speculation | "Users might want" | → Find evidence or reject |
Bundled Resources
references/research-prompts.md— Deep research templates by gap type. Use when gap assessment shows ≥3 missing elements.references/examples.md— Good/bad problem statement examples with explanations.assets/problem-statement.md— Copy-paste template for problem tables and CFD entries.
Handoff
Problem statement complete when quality gates pass. Next: v0.2 Market Definition (segments, sizing, ICP).
Score
Total Score
Based on repository quality metrics
SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている
ライセンスが設定されている
100文字以上の説明がある
GitHub Stars 100以上
1ヶ月以内に更新
10回以上フォークされている
オープンIssueが50未満
プログラミング言語が設定されている
1つ以上のタグが設定されている
Reviews
Reviews coming soon


