product-playbook 1.0.0

package/i18n/en/commands/product-full.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+description: Full Mode Product Planning — Run through all 20 steps across every framework, producing deliverable planning documents
+argument-hint: <product description>
+---
+
+Please read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/SKILL.md.
+Then read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/references/rules-full.md for the step sequence.
+When executing each step, load the corresponding reference files as indicated in rules-full.md.
+
+Execution mode: Full Mode
+Product description: $ARGUMENTS
+
+Follow the step sequence in rules-full.md (S1 → S20). First confirm the product type (B2B/B2C) and target audience, then begin the first step. Display a progress indicator at each step.

package/i18n/en/commands/product-prd.md

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+---
+description: Generate PRD Engineering Package — Integrates PR-FAQ + MVP + User Story + Pre-mortem, including flowcharts, DB Schema, and UI Wireframes
+---
+
+Please read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/SKILL.md.
+Then read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/references/04b-solutions.md (contains PRD template + flowchart/DB Schema/UI Wireframe specs).
+
+Based on the product planning content completed in the current conversation, generate the full PRD engineering package:
+1. PRD document (background & goals + feature scope + User Stories + feature specs + technical considerations + risks + milestones)
+2. Flowchart (Mermaid flowchart)
+3. DB Schema (Mermaid erDiagram)
+4. UI Wireframe (HTML low-fidelity wireframe)
+
+If no product planning content exists in the conversation, prompt the user to run a product planning flow first.

package/i18n/en/commands/product-quick.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+description: Quick Mode Product Planning — Run through JTBD → PR-FAQ → North Star in under 30 minutes, producing a one-page direction summary
+argument-hint: <product description>
+---
+
+Please read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/SKILL.md.
+Then read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/references/rules-quick.md for the step sequence.
+When executing each step, load the corresponding reference files as indicated in rules-quick.md.
+
+Execution mode: Quick Mode
+Product description: $ARGUMENTS
+
+Start immediately without confirming the mode. Follow the step sequence in rules-quick.md (S1 → S2 → S3), displaying a progress indicator at each step.

package/i18n/en/commands/product-report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+---
+description: Generate HTML Planning Report — Compile all product planning content into a single offline-readable HTML report
+---
+
+Please read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/SKILL.md and its references/06-html-report.md.
+
+Based on the product planning content completed in the current conversation, generate a full HTML planning report following the design specs in 06-html-report.md:
+- Single HTML file (CSS + JS inline, Google Fonts CDN loading Noto Sans TC)
+- Dynamically render completed stages; skip any stages not yet completed
+- Include sticky table-of-contents navigation, card-based layout, and interactive effects
+
+If no product planning content exists in the conversation, prompt the user to run a product planning flow first.

package/i18n/en/commands/product-revision.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+description: Revision Mode Product Planning — Optimize and iterate on an existing product, leveraging user data and feature foundations
+argument-hint: <product name and revision goals>
+---
+
+Please read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/SKILL.md.
+Then read ~/.claude/skills/product-playbook/references/rules-revision.md for the step sequence.
+When executing each step, load the corresponding reference files as indicated in rules-revision.md.
+
+Execution mode: Revision Mode
+Product description: $ARGUMENTS
+
+Follow the step sequence in rules-revision.md (S1 → S12). S1 will proactively ask about existing product metrics (DAU/MAU, retention rate, key user feedback, etc.). Display a progress indicator at each step.

package/i18n/en/references/00-opportunity-check.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+# Pre-Step: Opportunity Check
+
+> **Note: Which steps to execute per mode is authoritatively defined by the "Mode Step Sequences" in SKILL.md. The following is for reference only.**
+
+**Applicable: Full mode, high completeness, audience is executives/leadership**
+**Skippable: Quick mode, direct build mode, audience is engineers/designers**
+
+If the user is building a 0-to-1 product from scratch, run through these five questions first. A "no" on any question is a signal to rethink:
+
+```
+| # | Assessment Question | User's Answer | Assessment |
+|---|---------------------|---------------|------------|
+| 1 | Does this solve a real, urgent user pain point? Who are the first customers to benefit? How will you find them? | | ✅/⚠️ |
+| 2 | Do you have a unique advantage in solving this problem? Will target customers use it at least weekly? Is the market large enough? | | ✅/⚠️ |
+| 3 | With current resources, can you build a usable product within 2-3 years? | | ✅/⚠️ |
+| 4 | What does the competitive landscape look like? Can you win? What's your differentiation? | | ✅/⚠️ |
+| 5 | Is there a sustainable path for user growth and monetization? | | ✅/⚠️ |
+```
+
+## DHM Quick Check (Gibson Biddle / Netflix)
+
+Can this opportunity achieve:
+- **D (Delight)**: Surprise and exceed user expectations?
+- **H (Hard to copy)**: Be difficult for competitors to replicate?
+- **M (Margin-enhancing)**: Improve margins as scale grows?
+
+If some market signals are unclear, look for directional signals:
+- Macro trends (e.g., AI adoption creating workflow replacement opportunities)
+- Behavioral shifts (users already using workarounds, indicating real demand)
+- Analogous markets (find validated comparable scenarios)
+
+## Team Passion Check
+
+Confirm the team has genuine passion for this problem space. Teams lacking intrinsic motivation will inevitably falter on the path to PMF.
+
+---
+
+## 📎 File Integration Tips for This Stage
+
+| Uploaded Content | Integrate Into | Integration Action |
+|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|
+| Market reports (PDF) | Five assessment questions (#2 market size, #4 competitive landscape) | Replace assumptions with report data |
+| Industry analysis / trend reports | DHM + directional signals | Extract macro trends and behavioral shifts as DHM evidence |
+| Competitor funding/revenue info | Five assessment questions (#4, #5) | Assess competitive intensity and market validation signals |

package/i18n/en/references/01-strategy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+# Product Strategy Layer
+
+> **Note: Which steps to execute per mode is authoritatively defined by the "Mode Step Sequences" in SKILL.md. The following is for reference only.**
+
+**Applicable: Full mode, high completeness, audience is executives/cross-functional alignment**
+**Skippable: Quick mode, direct build mode, low completeness**
+
+## Strategy Blocks (Chandra Janakiraman / Headspace / Meta)
+
+The hierarchy of good strategy — each layer is the foundation for the next:
+
+```
+Mission
+  └→ Vision — What do you want the world to look like in 5-10 years?
+       └→ Strategy — How will you reach that vision? (Key choices and trade-offs)
+            └→ Goals / OKRs — Priorities for the next 6-12 months
+                 └→ Roadmap — What specifically will you build?
+                      └→ Tasks — Who does what, and when?
+```
+
+## Richard Rumelt's Kernel of Good Strategy
+
+- **Diagnosis**: Clearly define the challenge you face (not all problems — the most critical one)
+- **Guiding Policy**: Your overall approach (not a goal, but a method)
+- **Coherent Actions**: Specific actions that reinforce each other, not a collection of independent plans
+
+> Signs of bad strategy: Grand goals without diagnosis; fancy language masking hollow thinking; calling every plan a "strategy."
+
+## Shreyas Doshi's Three Levels of Product Work
+
+Before tackling any product problem, identify which level you're working at:
+
+```
+Level 3: Product Excellence — Doing the right things exceptionally well
+Level 2: Product Strategy — Doing the right things
+Level 1: Product Foundation — Having the foundation to do things (culture, processes, talent)
+```
+
+> Most PMs spend too much time on Level 3 while neglecting Level 2 problems. Most so-called "execution problems" are actually strategy problems at their root.
+
+## Shreyas Doshi's LNO Time Allocation Framework
+
+For each week's work items, first ask: What type of impact does this have on the product?
+
+```
+L (Leverage): Strategy, vision, culture → Invest ample time, pursue excellence
+N (Neutral): General collaboration, routine communication → Do it well, don't pursue perfection
+O (Overhead): Admin, meetings, paperwork → Finish quickly, don't over-invest
+```
+
+> Redirect saved O-time into neglected L-work.
+
+## OKR Writing Guidelines
+
+Goals/OKRs in Strategy Blocks are the critical layer for cascading strategy downward. Minimum rules for writing good OKRs:
+
+**Objective**: Qualitative, inspiring, understandable. Describe a state you want to achieve, not a to-do item.
+- ✅ Good O: "Make new users feel the product's core value on day one"
+- ❌ Bad O: "Complete onboarding redesign" (that's a task, not an objective)
+
+**Key Results**: Quantitative, measurable, time-bound. Describe how you'll know you've achieved the objective.
+- ✅ Good KR: "Increase new user D1 core action completion rate from 20% to 40%"
+- ❌ Bad KR: "Launch new onboarding flow" (that's an output, not an outcome)
+
+**Common pitfalls:**
+- Disguising a task list as OKRs ("Complete feature X" is not a KR)
+- Too many OKRs (aim for 2-3 Objectives per quarter, 3-5 KRs per Objective)
+- KRs that contradict or are unrelated to each other
+- Only lagging indicators, no leading indicators
+
+**Example:**
+```
+O: Make target users love our product (PMF Level 2 → Level 3)
+  KR1: D28 retention from 12% → 20%
+  KR2: Sean Ellis Score from 28% → 40%
+  KR3: Monthly organic referral share from 10% → 25%
+```
+
+## Three Core Product Questions (Throughout the Entire Process)
+
+These three questions must be answered in order — **the sequence cannot be swapped**:
+
+> **Q1: How to get people in the front door?**
+> **Q2: How to reach the Aha Moment as fast as possible?**
+> **Q3: How to deliver core value repeatedly?**
+
+In the Define stage, these translate to:
+- **Who is it for?**
+- **Why build it?**
+- **What is it?**

package/i18n/en/references/02a-persona.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# Stage 1: Discovery — Building Personas
+
+## Continuous Discovery Habits (Teresa Torres)
+
+Build one key habit: **Talk to at least one target user every week.** Discovery is not a one-time ritual — it's an ongoing system.
+
+> "Product discovery should be a continuous habit, not a one-time ceremony before a project starts." — Teresa Torres
+
+## 1.1 Build the Persona Table
+
+Personas are not segmented by age and gender, but by **purpose / task / motivation** to distinguish different types of users.
+
+```
+| Field | Persona 1: [Nickname] | Persona 2: [Nickname] | Persona 3: [Nickname] |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Purpose / Task / Motivation | | | |
+| Size (SCALE) | | | |
+| Problems / Challenges / Drivers | | | |
+| Current Approach & Rationale | | | |
+| Frequency | | | |
+| Information Sources | | | |
+| Adoption / Execution Barriers | | | |
+```
+
+Explain the segmentation logic; check for MECE (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive); identify the primary TA and secondary TA.
+
+### 📝 Persona Quality Checklist
+- ✅ Is the segmentation based on "purpose/task/motivation" rather than demographics?
+- ✅ Are Personas MECE (mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive of the target market)?
+- ✅ Is the primary TA vs. secondary TA clearly identified?
+- ✅ Are each Persona's "problems/challenges" based on real observations or reasonable inferences?
+- ✅ Is "current approach & rationale" specific enough to identify workarounds?
+- ❌ Common issues: Segmenting by age/gender, minimal differences between Personas, pain points too vague
+
+## 1.2 Build Persona Cards
+
+```
+## [Persona Nickname]: [One-line description]
+
+**Basic Info**: Age / Gender / Occupation / Location / Personality traits
+**Background**: [Product-relevant background description]
+**Goals / Tasks**: [Goal 1], [Goal 2]
+**Current Approach & Rationale**: [What they currently do and why]
+**Information Sources**: [Where they get relevant information]
+**Barriers / Problems / Challenges / Frustrations**: [Pain point 1], [Pain point 2], [Pain point 3]
+```
+
+---
+
+## 📎 File Integration Tips for This Stage
+
+If the user uploads files during this stage, Claude integrates according to these rules:
+
+| Uploaded Content | Integrate Into | Integration Action |
+|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|
+| User interview transcripts / audio transcriptions | 1.1 Persona + 1.3 JTBD | Extract: user background → Persona fields; pain points + current approach → JTBD deep-dive questions; emotional reactions → emotional/social Jobs |
+| User research report (PDF) | 1.1 + 1.2 + 1.3 | Extract quantitative data (user segment proportions) into Persona size; extract qualitative insights into JTBD |

package/i18n/en/references/02b-jtbd.md

@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+# Phase 1: Discovery — JTBD Analysis
+
+## 1.3 JTBD (Jobs to Be Done) Analysis
+
+> "The unit of analysis is not the consumer, but the job the consumer is trying to get done." — Clayton Christensen
+
+**JTBD Statement Formula:**
+```
+[Target customer] + wants to, in [what job context] + get [what job] done
+```
+
+Example: A first-time homebuyer comparing mortgage options wants to quickly estimate monthly payments late at night when they can't reach a bank, so they can walk their partner through their financial plan.
+
+**JTBD Four-Type Analysis Table:**
+
+```
+| JTBD Type | Definition | Persona 1 | Persona 2 |
+|-----------|------------|-----------|-----------|
+| Functional Job | Completing a specific task or achieving a functional goal | | |
+| Emotional Job | How they feel or want to feel | | |
+| Social Job | How they want to be perceived by others | | |
+| Job Context | Under what circumstances they need to get this job done | | |
+```
+
+**JTBD Deep-Dive Five Questions:**
+1. **Root Problem**: Behind what users express as their need, what are they really trying to solve?
+2. **Current Constraints**: What solutions have been ruled out due to certain limitations?
+3. **Current Workarounds**: How are users coping today? What workarounds have they built?
+4. **Gap**: Where do current workarounds fall short? (This gap is your opportunity)
+5. **Ideal Solution**: If constraints were removed, what would their ideal solution look like?
+
+**Teresa Torres User Interview Best Practices:**
+- Focus on users' **actual past behavior**, not hypothetical future behavior
+- Ask "Last time you ran into this problem, what did you do?" instead of "What features would you like?"
+- Most common mistakes: asking hypothetical questions, introducing solution bias, not probing for details
+
+### 📝 JTBD Quality Checklist
+
+Claude must self-check after producing JTBD output (each item must be marked ✅ or ❌; ❌ items must include how to improve):
+- [ ] Does it include a specific context? (Not "anytime, anywhere" — but "late at night when they can't reach a bank")
+- [ ] Does it focus on a single core job? (Not three jobs crammed into one sentence)
+- [ ] Are functional, emotional, and social jobs all identified?
+- [ ] Can it be used to evaluate "Does this solution actually address this job?"
+- [ ] Does it include "current workarounds" and "gap"? (Gap = opportunity)
+- [ ] Does Q5 of the Deep-Dive reach emotional motivation / professional identity / psychological fear? (Not just functional descriptions)
+
+**Execution Rules (Hard Gate):**
+- Must mark each item ✅ or ❌ — blank [ ] or unexplained ✅ lists are not allowed
+- If all items are ✅, must additionally state "What is the weakest part of this analysis and how to strengthen it"
+- ❌ Common issues: too abstract, too many jobs merged, missing context, substituting product features for job descriptions, Q5 staying at the functional level
+
+---
+
+### 🏢 B2B Product Deep-Dive Requirements
+
+**B2B products (including B2B2C) must complete the following analysis:**
+
+#### Organizational-Level Job Analysis (Required — cover at least 2 levels)
+
+| Level | Description | Examples |
+|-------|-------------|----------|
+| **Strategic Job** | Cross-departmental needs at the org/management level | Compliance audits, cost control, workforce optimization |
+| **Operational Job** | Coordination needs at the process/department manager level | Approval workflow management, cross-team information sync |
+| **Task Job** | Day-to-day operational needs of individual users | Filling out forms, checking status, exporting reports |
+
+#### Buyer vs. User Analysis (Required)
+
+If the buyer and user are different people, analyze their JTBD separately:
+- **Buyer Job**: Jobs that influence the purchasing decision (ROI justification, risk reduction, compliance requirements)
+- **User Job**: Jobs that need to get done during daily operations (efficiency gains, error reduction)
+- If they are the same person, explain "why the decision-maker is also the user in this scenario"
+
+#### Deep-Dive Five Questions — B2B Enhanced Version
+
+**Q5 must reach at least one of the following levels** (examples):
+- ✅ Professional identity: "She's afraid of looking incompetent in front of leadership, because this report represents her department's credibility"
+- ✅ Emotional motivation: "He wants to demonstrate to his direct reports that he has a firm grasp of the numbers"
+- ✅ Psychological fear: "Her biggest fear is the auditor catching a process gap — she was already warned once before"
+- ❌ Failing example: "He needs a better tool to improve efficiency" (stays at the functional level)
+
+#### Competitive Alternatives Analysis (Required)
+
+List the alternatives users are actually using today:
+- At least 2 named existing tools (e.g., Slack / Excel / paper forms / email / verbal communication)
+- For each tool, explain its "fundamental flaw": not that the features are weak, but "why this flaw has been accepted and left unsolved" (organizational inertia? switching costs? leadership doesn't care?)
+
+### 📋 User Interview Plan Template
+
+```
+## User Interview Plan
+
+**Research Goal**: Understand how [target Persona] deals with [specific problem] in [Job Context]
+**Screening Criteria**:
+  - Must have experienced [specific behavior] within the past [X days/weeks]
+  - Exclude: [who is not a fit — e.g., internal employees, known power users]
+
+**Core Questions (5–7)**:
+1. Last time you ran into [problem], can you walk me through how you handled it? (Behavioral recall)
+2. During that process, what was the most frustrating or time-consuming part? (Pain point identification)
+3. Have you tried other approaches? Why or why not? (Current alternatives)
+4. If that part could be better, what would "better" look like to you? (Ideal state)
+5. How often does this happen? When was the last time? (Frequency and urgency)
+6. Besides you, who else is affected by this problem? (Stakeholder mapping)
+7. On a scale of 1–10, how severe is this problem for you? Why? (Quantifying the pain)
+
+**Follow-up Strategies**:
+  - When the interviewee says "Usually I..." → Ask "What specifically happened last time?"
+  - When the interviewee mentions an emotion → Ask "Can you describe that feeling more specifically?"
+  - When the interviewee mentions a tool/method → Ask "What made you choose that approach?"
+
+**Documentation Format**:
+  - Verbatim transcript or recording
+  - Within 24 hours post-interview, tag: key quotes / pain points / surprising findings / contradictions to assumptions
+```
+
+---
+
+## 📎 File Integration Notes for This Phase
+
+If the user uploads files during this phase, Claude integrates them as follows:
+
+| Uploaded Content | Integrate Into | Integration Action |
+|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|
+| User interview transcripts / recording text | 1.1 Persona + 1.3 JTBD | Extract: user background → Persona fields; pain points + current workarounds → JTBD Deep-Dive Five Questions; emotional reactions → Emotional / Social Jobs |
+| Competitor app screenshots | 1.3 JTBD (current workarounds) | Identify as user's "current alternative," analyze workarounds and gaps |

package/i18n/en/references/02c-ost-journey.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+# Stage 1: Discovery — OST + Journey Map
+
+## 1.4 Opportunity Solution Tree (OST)
+
+**Applicable: Full mode / high completeness**
+
+The OST starts from the product goal and systematically connects opportunities to solutions:
+
+```
+[Product Goal / Desired Outcome]
+    │
+    ├── [Opportunity 1: User pain point or need]
+    │       ├── [Solution 1a]
+    │       └── [Solution 1b]
+    ├── [Opportunity 2: User pain point or need]
+    │       └── [Solution 2a]
+    └── [Opportunity 3: User pain point or need]
+            └── [Solution 3a]
+```
+
+Core principles:
+- The goal (Outcome) is a measurable result, not a feature or output
+- Opportunities come from user research, not internal brainstorming
+- Solutions map to opportunities — don't skip opportunities and jump straight to solutions
+- Go broad, then deep: list all opportunities first, then explore solutions one by one
+
+## 1.5 User Journey Map
+
+**Applicable: Full mode / high completeness / audience is designers**
+
+**Step 1: Overview Table**
+
+```
+**[Persona Name] — Task: [Task description]**
+
+| Stage | Core Behavior | Emotion | Key Pain Point |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| [Stage 1] | [One-line description of primary behavior] | [Emotion + emoji] | [The most important pain point] |
+```
+
+**Step 2: Expand Each Stage in Detail**
+
+```
+> **Stage: [Stage Name]**
+> - **Doing**: [What the user actually does at this stage]
+> - **Thinking**: [What's going through the user's mind, ideally in first-person voice]
+> - **Feeling**: [Emotional state and why]
+> - **Stakeholder**: [Who is involved at this stage]
+> - **Problem**: [Specific difficulties or frustrations]
+```
+
+**Step 3: Grouping**
+- If stages are too granular, merge them into larger stage groups
+- Consolidate pain points across stages, flag which are core pain points
+
+---
+
+## 📎 File Integration Tips for This Stage
+
+If the user uploads files during this stage, Claude integrates according to these rules:
+
+| Uploaded Content | Integrate Into | Integration Action |
+|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|
+| Whiteboard / hand-drawn flow diagrams | 1.5 Journey Map | Recognize the flow and convert to structured table; preserve original emotion markers |
+| User behavior data (CSV) | 1.4 OST + 1.5 Journey Map | Use data to validate which behavior paths are most common and which stages have the highest drop-off |

package/i18n/en/references/03-define.md

@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
+# Stage 2: Define — Converging on the Problem
+
+> **Note: Which steps to execute per mode is authoritatively defined by the "Mode Step Sequences" in SKILL.md. The following is for reference only.**
+
+**Full mode / high completeness → Do all (2.1 ~ 2.4)**
+**Medium completeness → 2.1 + 2.3 + 2.4**
+**Quick mode / low completeness → Only 2.3 (one core HMW)**
+
+Before entering this stage, confirm the three core product questions: Who is it for? / Why build it? / What is it?
+
+## 2.1 Pain Point Summary Table
+
+Extract pain points from all Personas and User Journey Maps:
+
+```
+| # | Pain Point Description | Source Persona | Appears in Stage | Impact Level (High/Med/Low) | Frequency (High/Med/Low) |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| P1 | | | | | |
+| P2 | | | | | |
+```
+
+## 2.2 April Dunford's Positioning Framework
+
+**Applicable: Medium/high completeness / audience is executives/sales/marketing**
+
+Positioning is not a tagline — it's deciding where you compete and for whom:
+
+```
+| Positioning Element | Question | Your Answer |
+|---------------------|----------|-------------|
+| Competitive Alternatives | If your product didn't exist, what would users use? (The real answer, not who you think your competitors are) | |
+| Unique Attributes | What do you have that competitive alternatives don't? | |
+| Value for Users | What tangible value do these unique attributes deliver to users? | |
+| Target Market Characteristics | Which users care most about this value? (The more specific, the better) | |
+| Market Category | What market frame best positions your product? (The frame determines the competitive criteria) | |
+```
+
+Most common positioning mistakes:
+- Treating features as positioning ("We have AI!" is not positioning)
+- Positioning too broadly — covering everyone means covering no one
+- Using your perceived competitors as the reference rather than the user's actual alternatives
+
+### 📝 Positioning Quality Checklist
+- ✅ Are "competitive alternatives" from the user's perspective? (What users actually use instead, not who you think your competitors are)
+- ✅ Are "unique attributes" things competitive alternatives can't do or can't do well? (Not things you both have)
+- ✅ Is "value for users" stated in user language or product language? ("Saves 2 hours" vs. "AI-powered automation")
+- ✅ Is the "target market" specific enough to actually find these people?
+- ✅ Are all five positioning elements logically consistent?
+- ❌ Common issues: Disconnect between unique attributes and value, wrong market category leading to being judged by wrong criteria
+
+## 2.3 HMW (How Might We) Problem Reframing
+
+Transform pain points into HMW questions, combining the JTBD lens to confirm the job type behind each HMW:
+
+```
+| Pain Point # | Pain Point | Corresponding JTBD Type | HMW Question |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| P1 | [Pain point description] | Functional / Emotional / Social | How might we... |
+| P2 | [Pain point description] | | How might we... |
+```
+
+HMW granularity principle:
+- Too broad ("How to make users happier") → No direction
+- Just right ("How to let users complete first-time setup in 60 seconds") → Constrained yet open
+- Too narrow ("How to change the button color") → Limits possibilities
+
+### 📝 HMW Quality Checklist
+- ✅ Does it have clear constraints? (Not completely open-ended)
+- ✅ Does it leave enough room for multiple solutions? (Not pointing to a single answer)
+- ✅ Can it be directly mapped to a JTBD or pain point?
+- ✅ Can the team start brainstorming solutions upon seeing this HMW?
+- ❌ Common issues: Too broad (restates the vision), too narrow (specifies the solution), multiple problems mixed together
+
+**Examples:**
+- ❌ Too broad: "How might we make users more satisfied?"
+- ✅ Just right: "How might we help first-time homebuyers calculate their affordable mortgage amount in 3 minutes?"
+- ❌ Too narrow: "How might we add a mortgage calculator to the homepage?"
+
+## 2.4 Opportunity Assessment Table
+
+Prioritize HMW questions:
+
+```
+| HMW Question | Affected Persona | Persona Size | User Impact (1-5) | Business Value (1-5) | Feasibility (1-5) | Total | Priority |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| | [List affected Personas] | [Large/Med/Small] | | | | | |
+```
+
+**Scoring Scale Definitions:**
+
+| Score | User Impact | Business Value | Feasibility |
+|-------|-----------|---------------|-------------|
+| 1 | Minor inconvenience for few users | Indirect, long-term payoff at best | Requires entirely new technology or extensive R&D |
+| 2 | Some users encounter occasionally | May indirectly move some metrics | Requires significant new capability building (3+ months) |
+| 3 | Core TA encounters regularly | Positive impact on key metrics | Requires some new development but technically feasible (1-3 months) |
+| 4 | Many users encounter frequently | Directly drives user growth or retention | Within current team capabilities, 2-4 weeks |
+| 5 | Many users can't complete core tasks daily | Directly drives revenue or significantly impacts North Star Metric | Current team can complete within two weeks |
+
+**Shreyas Doshi's Opportunity Cost Thinking:**
+
+Don't ask "What's the ROI of this feature?" Instead, ask:
+
+> "If I invest resources in A, I'm giving up the opportunity to invest in B. Am I sure A is more worthwhile than B?"
+
+ROI thinking evaluates whether a single opportunity is worth pursuing; opportunity cost thinking helps you make better choices across all opportunities.
+
+**0-to-1 Focus Reminder:** After completing the opportunity assessment, it's recommended to pick **only one top-priority HMW question** as the MVP core. (Facebook: college students → high schoolers → everyone; profile page → photos → news feed)
+
+---
+
+## 📎 File Integration Tips for This Stage
+
+| Uploaded Content | Integrate Into | Integration Action |
+|-----------------|----------------|-------------------|
+| Competitor screenshots / competitive analysis reports | 2.2 Positioning | Fill in "competitive alternatives" and "unique attributes" fields; compare differentiation |
+| Market reports (PDF) | 2.4 Opportunity Assessment | Use market data to validate Persona size and business value scores |
+| NPS / satisfaction survey data | 2.1 Pain Point Summary | Replace assumed impact levels and frequencies with actual scores |
+| Customer support / ticket summaries | 2.1 Pain Point Summary + 2.3 HMW | Count pain point frequency; convert high-frequency tickets directly into HMW questions |