Skip to content

02 · Product & project management

You translate Mr. Tech’s field intelligence and founder direction into PRDs, sprints, and shipped defenses. Clarity’s rule: no feature exists without a documented failure mode it answers.

Use case: Turn field intel into a PRD.

Mr. Tech reports a new failure mode at an MSP deployment. You paste his raw notes into the Clarity PM Project and type:

Opening prompt Claude Project: PM

Structure this field report: symptom → root-cause hypothesis → which competing product → does our architecture already defend against it (cite the mechanism) or is this a gap? If gap, draft the invariant that would close it.

Claude identifies it as a gap. You continue:

Follow-up 1 Claude Project: PM

It’s a gap. Draft a PRD in Clarity house style: (1) Problem — the failure mode above, (2) Architectural defense — how the ephemeral-sandbox model applies, (3) Scope + explicit non-goals, (4) Security invariants touched, (5) Acceptance criteria as testable statements, (6) Rollout: pilot → MSP path. Under 2 pages.

The draft is solid but the acceptance criteria are soft. You type:

Follow-up 2 Claude Project: PM

Rewrite every acceptance criterion so it’s mechanically checkable — something CI or a red-team script could pass/fail. No “should be secure.”

Done. You export to the PRD folder and tag the Founder and Mr. Tech.

Use case: Sprint status for stakeholders.

Prompt Claude chat

Turn these raw notes into a status update: Shipped / At risk (with the single decision needed) / Next. Max 150 words. Audience: [Founder / Mr. Tech / design partner].

Use case: Meeting → actions.

Prompt Claude chat

Extract from this transcript: decisions made, action items (owner + due date), open questions, and anything touching a security invariant — flag those separately. Table format.

Use case: Workback schedule.

Prompt Claude Project: PM

Build a workback schedule for [milestone] with delivery date [date], mapped to the nine-phase BUILD.md sequence. Flag any phase where the 28-day timeline assumption breaks. Table format.

Use case: Acceptance-criteria review.

Prompt Claude Project: PM

Review these acceptance criteria against BUILD.md’s per-phase criteria style. Which are testable as written, which are vibes? Rewrite the vibes.