
one-pager-prd
Creates concise, decision-ready product specifications (one-pagers and PRDs) that align stakeholders on problem, solution, users, success metrics, and constraints. Use when proposing new features/products, documenting product requirements, creating concise specs for stakeholder alignment, pitching initiatives, scoping projects before detailed design, capturing user stories and success metrics, or when user mentions one-pager, PRD, product spec, feature proposal, product requirements, or brief.
- Installs
- 121
- Last 24h
- —
- Trending rank
- —
- Security
- Not audited
Install
Works with every agent the skills CLI supports.
npx skills add https://github.com/lyndonkl/claude --skill one-pager-prd- 01
Install
Run the command in your project. The CLI asks which agents to install for.
- 02
Describe the task
Ask your agent for something this skill covers. It loads one-pager-prd automatically when relevant.
- 03
Review the result
The agent follows the SKILL.md steps, scripts and references bundled with the skill.
SKILL.md
The instructions your agent reads when the skill is triggered.
One-Pager PRD
When NOT to use: Detailed technical design docs (use ADRs instead), comprehensive product strategy (too high-level for one-pager), user research synthesis (different format), post-launch retrospectives (use postmortem skill).
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
One-Pager PRD Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Gather context
- [ ] Step 2: Choose format
- [ ] Step 3: Draft one-pager
- [ ] Step 4: Validate quality
- [ ] Step 5: Review and iterate
Step 1: Gather context
Identify the problem (user pain, data supporting it), proposed solution (high-level approach), target users (personas, segments), success criteria (goals, metrics), and constraints (technical, business, timeline). See Common Patterns for typical problem types.
Step 2: Choose format
For simple features needing quick approval → Use resources/template.md one-pager format (1 page, bullets). For complex features/products requiring detailed requirements → Use resources/template.md full PRD format (1-2 pages). For writing guidance and structure → Study resources/methodology.md for problem framing, metric definition, scope techniques.
Step 3: Draft one-pager
Create one-pager-prd.md with: problem statement (user pain + why now), solution overview (what we're building), user personas and use cases, goals with quantified metrics, in-scope flows and out-of-scope items, constraints and assumptions, open questions to resolve. Keep concise—1 page for one-pager, 1-2 for PRD.
Step 4: Validate quality
Self-assess using resources/evaluators/rubric_one_pager_prd.json. Check: problem is specific and user-focused, solution is clear without being overly detailed, metrics are measurable and have targets, scope is realistic and boundaries clear, constraints acknowledged, open questions identified. Minimum standard: Average score ≥ 3.5.
Step 5: Review and iterate
Share with stakeholders (PM, design, engineering, business). Gather feedback on problem framing, solution approach, scope boundaries, and success metrics. Iterate based on input. Get explicit sign-off before moving to detailed design/development.
Common Patterns
By Problem Type
User Pain (Most Common):
- Pattern: Users can't do X, causing friction Y
- Example: "Users can't search by multiple filters, forcing 10+ clicks to find items"
- Validation: User interviews, support tickets, analytics showing workarounds
Competitive Gap:
- Pattern: Competitor has feature, we don't, causing churn
- Example: "Competitors offer bulk actions. 20% of churned users cited this"
- Validation: Churn analysis, competitive analysis, win/loss interviews
Strategic Opportunity:
- Pattern: Market shift creates opening for new capability
- Example: "Remote work surge → need async collaboration features"
- Validation: Market research, early customer interest, trend analysis
Technical Debt/Scalability:
- Pattern: Current system doesn't scale, blocking growth
- Example: "Database queries timeout above 100K users. Growth blocked."
- Validation: Performance metrics, system capacity analysis
By Solution Complexity
Simple Feature (Weeks):
- Clear requirements, minor scope
- Example: Add export to CSV button
- One-Pager: Problem, solution (1 sentence), metrics, constraints
Medium Feature (Months):
- Multiple user flows, some complexity
- Example: Commenting system with notifications
- PRD: Detailed flows, edge cases, phasing (MVP vs v2)
Large Initiative (Quarters):
- Cross-functional, strategic
- Example: Mobile app launch
- Multi-Page PRD: Break into phases, each with own one-pager
By User Segment
B2B SaaS:
- Emphasize: ROI, admin controls, security, integrations
- Metrics: Adoption rate, time-to-value, NPS
B2C Consumer:
- Emphasize: Delight, ease of use, viral potential
- Metrics: Daily active users, retention curves, referrals
Enterprise:
- Emphasize: Compliance, customization, support
- Metrics: Deal size impact, deployment success, enterprise NPS
Internal Tools:
- Emphasize: Efficiency gains, adoption by teams
- Metrics: Time saved, task completion rate, employee satisfaction
Guardrails
Problem:
- Specific, not vague: ❌ "Users want better search" → ✓ "Users abandon search after 3 failed queries (30% of sessions)"
- User-focused: Focus on user pain, not internal goals ("We want to increase engagement" is goal, not problem)
- Validated: Cite data (analytics, interviews, support tickets) not assumptions
Solution:
- High-level, not over-specified: Describe what, not how. Leave design/engineering latitude.
- Falsifiable: Clear enough that stakeholders can disagree or suggest alternatives
- Scope-appropriate: Don't design UI in one-pager. "Filter panel" not "Dropdown menu with checkbox multi-select"
Metrics:
- Measurable: Must be quantifiable. ❌ "Improve UX" → ✓ "Reduce time-to-complete from 5 min to 2 min"
- Leading + Lagging: Include both (leading: adoption rate, lagging: revenue impact)
- Baselines + Targets: Current state + goal. "Increase NPS from 40 to 55"
Scope:
- Crisp boundaries: Explicitly state what's in/out
- MVP vs Future: Separate must-haves from nice-to-haves
- User flows: Describe key happy path, edge cases
Constraints:
- Realistic: Acknowledge tech debt, dependencies, timeline limits
- Trade-offs: Explicit about what we're sacrificing (speed vs quality, features vs simplicity)
Red Flags:
- Solution looking for problem (built it because cool tech, not user need)
- Vague metrics (no baselines, no targets, no timeframes)
- Scope creep (everything is "must-have")
- No constraints mentioned (unrealistic optimism)
- No open questions (haven't thought deeply)
Quick Reference
Resources:
resources/template.md- One-pager and PRD templates with section guidanceresources/methodology.md- Problem framing techniques, metric trees, scope prioritization, writing clarityresources/evaluators/rubric_one_pager_prd.json- Quality criteria
Output: one-pager-prd.md with problem, solution, users, goals/metrics, scope, constraints, open questions
Success Criteria:
- Problem is specific with validation (data/research)
- Solution is clear high-level approach (what, not how)
- Metrics are measurable with baselines + targets
- Scope has crisp in/out boundaries
- Constraints acknowledged
- Open questions identified
- Stakeholder sign-off obtained
- Score ≥ 3.5 on rubric
Quick Decisions:
- Simple feature, quick approval? → One-pager (1 page, bullets)
- Complex feature, detailed handoff? → Full PRD (1-2 pages)
- Multiple phases? → Separate one-pager per phase
- Strategic initiative? → Start with one-pager, expand to multi-page if needed
Common Mistakes:
- Problem too vague ("improve experience")
- Solution too detailed (specifying UI components)
- No metrics or unmeasurable metrics
- Scope creep (no "out of scope" section)
- Ignoring constraints (unrealistic timelines)
- No validation (assumptions not data)
- Writing for yourself, not stakeholders
Key Insight: Brevity forces clarity. If you can't explain it in 1-2 pages, you haven't thought it through. One-pager is thinking tool as much as communication tool.
Format Tips:
- Use bullets, not paragraphs (scannable)
- Lead with problem (earn the right to propose solution)
- Quantify everything possible (numbers > adjectives)
- Make scope boundaries explicit (prevent misunderstandings)
- Surface open questions (show you've thought deeply)
Stakeholder Adaptation:
- For Execs: Emphasize business impact, metrics, resource needs
- For Engineering: Technical constraints, dependencies, phasing
- For Design: User flows, personas, success criteria
- For Sales/Marketing: Competitive positioning, customer value, launch timing
FAQ
What does the one-pager-prd skill do?
Creates concise, decision-ready product specifications (one-pagers and PRDs) that align stakeholders on problem, solution, users, success metrics, and constraints. Use when proposing new features/products, documenting product requirements, creating concise specs for stakeholder alignment, pitching initiatives, scoping projects before detailed design, capturing user stories and success metrics, or when user mentions one-pager, PRD, product spec, feature proposal, product requirements, or brief.
How do I install one-pager-prd?
Run npx skills add https://github.com/lyndonkl/claude --skill one-pager-prd in your project. The skills CLI detects the agents you use and copies the skill into the right folder. For Claude Code you can also place the skill folder at ~/.claude/skills/one-pager-prd/ (personal) or .claude/skills/one-pager-prd/ (project).
Which AI agents can use one-pager-prd?
Any agent that supports the open Agent Skills format (a folder with a SKILL.md file), including Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Gemini CLI, Windsurf, Cline, OpenCode and more.
Is one-pager-prd safe to install?
No partner security audit is available yet. Skills can run commands and scripts, so read the SKILL.md and any bundled files before installing.
Who maintains one-pager-prd?
It is published by lyndonkl in lyndonkl/claude. It has 121 recorded installs.
More from lyndonkl/claude
evaluation-rubrics
lyndonkl/claude
Designs structured scoring tools with explicit criteria, performance scales, and descriptors for consistent, transparent quality assessment. Use when need quality criteria and scoring scales to evaluate work consistently, compare alternatives objectively, set acceptance thresholds, reduce subjective bias, or when user mentions rubric, scoring criteria, quality standards, evaluation framework, inter-rater reliability, or grading/assessing work.
strategy-and-competitive-analysis
lyndonkl/claude
Develops business strategies grounded in rigorous competitive and market analysis using proven frameworks (Good Strategy kernel, Porter's 5 Forces, SWOT, Blue Ocean, Playing to Win, Value Chain Analysis, BCG Matrix). Use when developing strategy (market entry, product launch, expansion, M&A, turnaround), conducting competitive analysis, making strategic decisions (build vs buy, pricing, positioning), planning strategic initiatives, or when user mentions strategy, competitive analysis, Porter's 5 Forces, SWOT, market positioning, or strategic frameworks.
scientific-manuscript-review
lyndonkl/claude
Guides systematic multi-pass review and editing of scientific manuscripts (research articles, reviews, perspectives) to improve clarity, structure, scientific rigor, and reader comprehension. Use when reviewing or editing research manuscripts, journal articles, or perspectives, when user mentions manuscript, paper draft, article, research writing, journal submission, reviewer feedback, or needs to improve scientific writing.
memory-retrieval-learning
lyndonkl/claude
Open the skill to read its SKILL.md instructions.
socratic-teaching-scaffolds
lyndonkl/claude
Open the skill to read its SKILL.md instructions.
grant-proposal-assistant
lyndonkl/claude
Guides creation and review of competitive grant proposals (NIH R01/R21/K, NSF, foundations) by applying reviewer-perspective thinking to ensure clear hypotheses, compelling significance, genuine innovation, and feasible approaches. Use when writing or reviewing grant proposals, crafting specific aims, drafting significance/innovation/approach sections, or when user mentions R01, R21, K-series, grant writing, proposal review, study section, or fundable hypothesis.
Popular code quality & workflow skills
grill-me
mattpocock/skills
A relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design.
improve-codebase-architecture
mattpocock/skills
Scan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.
handoff
mattpocock/skills
Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.
domain-modeling
mattpocock/skills
Build and sharpen a project's domain model. Use when discussing codebase terminology, writing or editing a GLOSSARY.md, or recording or editing an ADR.
codebase-design
mattpocock/skills
Shared vocabulary for designing deep modules. Use when the user wants to design or improve a module's interface, find deepening opportunities, decide where a seam goes, make code more testable or AI-navigable, or when another skill needs the deep-module vocabulary.
diagnosing-bugs
mattpocock/skills
Diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Use when the user says "diagnose"/"debug this", or reports something broken/throwing/failing/slow.