Pm skill creator
Skill Infrasity-Labs/dev-gtm-claude-skills/.claude/skills/pm-skill-creator
Design a new PM skill through guided conversation. Use when you have raw content or an idea and want to shape it into a compliant skill.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add Infrasity-Labs/dev-gtm-claude-skills --skill pm-skill-creatorAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
SKILL.md
13.9 KB, ~3.0k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Purpose
Walk through the full skill design process interactively — from raw idea or content to a structured, repo-compliant SKILL.md draft. Asks adaptive questions to determine skill type, scope, structure, and content, then generates a ready-to-validate draft.
This skill sits with you and figures out what to build before you build it — shaping a raw idea or content into the right structure through conversation, then generating a draft you can validate.
Key Concepts
The Three Skill Types (Decision Criteria)
- Component: One artifact or template. Self-contained. Gets referenced by other skills. Ask: "Is this a thing someone creates?"
- Interactive: Guided conversation with adaptive questions and enumerated recommendations. Ask: "Does this require back-and-forth to be useful?"
- Workflow: Multi-phase orchestration referencing other skills. Ask: "Does this coordinate multiple activities across steps?"
Skill Anatomy (Non-Negotiable Sections)
Every skill requires these sections in order:
- Purpose — What it does + when to use it (outcome-focused)
- Key Concepts — Frameworks, definitions, mental models
- Application — Step-by-step instructions an agent can follow
- Examples — At least one concrete, specific example
- Common Pitfalls — Named failure modes with consequences and fixes
- References — Related skills, external frameworks, source material
Metadata Constraints
name: lowercase kebab-case, ≤ 64 charactersdescription: ≤ 200 characters, must include trigger cue ("Use when...")intent: longer repo-facing summary (no character limit)type: one ofcomponent,interactive,workflow
Facilitation Protocol
Run this skill as a guided conversation using this interaction protocol:
- Open with a one-line heads-up, then offer an entry mode: Guided (one question at a time), Context dump (the user pastes everything up front), or Best guess (proceed from the topic alone).
- Ask one question per turn in plain language; wait for the answer before asking the next. Never bundle multiple questions.
- Label progress on each question (e.g.,
Context Q1/5). - With each question, offer numbered response options and a recommended default; include
Other (specify)when useful. - Handle interruptions gracefully and allow the user to pause and resume.
- At decision points, present numbered recommendations rather than a single take.
Application
This interactive skill asks up to 5 adaptive questions, then delivers a complete SKILL.md draft with frontmatter, all required sections, and repo-compliant structure.
Step 0: Session Start
Agent says:
"I'll help you design a new PM skill from scratch. This takes about 10-15 minutes and up to 5 questions. How do you want to start?
- Guided — I'll ask questions one at a time and build the skill from your answers (recommended)
- Context dump — Paste your raw content, notes, or framework and I'll propose a skill structure
- Best guess — Tell me just the topic and I'll draft a skill you can refine"
Question 1: What's the Raw Material? (Q1/5)
Agent asks:
"What are we turning into a skill? Give me whatever you have."
- A framework or mental model — A structured way of thinking about a PM problem (e.g., prioritization matrix, decision tree)
- A template or artifact — A deliverable PMs create (e.g., PRD section, positioning statement, epic format)
- A process or workflow — A multi-step method for completing a PM task (e.g., discovery sprint, roadmap planning)
- A coaching or advisory topic — A domain where PMs need guided, adaptive help (e.g., stakeholder navigation, pricing decisions)
Or describe what you have in your own words.
Agent note: If the user pastes raw content instead of choosing an option, analyze the content and infer the answer. Confirm your interpretation before proceeding.
Question 2: Skill Type Decision (Q2/5)
Based on Q1 answer, agent recommends a type and confirms:
If Q1 = Framework or Template:
"This sounds like a component skill — a self-contained artifact or reference. It would include a template, quality criteria, and examples. Does that fit, or is there a conversational/adaptive element I'm missing?
- Yes, component — It's a standalone deliverable or reference
- Actually, it needs conversation — Users need guided questions to use it well (→ interactive)
- It's bigger than one artifact — It orchestrates multiple steps or other skills (→ workflow)"
If Q1 = Process or Workflow:
"This sounds like a workflow skill — a multi-phase process. Does it reference or orchestrate other discrete skills/artifacts, or is it more of a guided conversation?
- Yes, workflow — It has distinct phases and may reference other skills
- It's more conversational — The value comes from adaptive questions and recommendations (→ interactive)
- It's simpler than I described — Really it's one artifact with steps (→ component)"
If Q1 = Coaching or Advisory:
"This sounds like an interactive skill — guided questions that adapt based on answers, ending with enumerated recommendations. Sound right?
- Yes, interactive — It needs back-and-forth to be useful
- It's more of a reference — Users just need the framework, not a conversation (→ component)
- It's a full process — Multiple phases, orchestrates other skills (→ workflow)"
Question 3: Scope and Naming (Q3/5)
Agent asks:
"What should we call this skill? I need two things:
a) A working name — lowercase-kebab-case, max 64 characters (e.g., feature-investment-advisor, user-story, discovery-process)
b) A one-sentence description — What it does + when to use it. Must fit in 200 characters and start with a verb or 'Use when...'
Give me your best attempt and I'll tighten it if needed. Or just describe the skill's purpose and I'll propose both."
Agent note: Validate the name format (kebab-case, ≤ 64 chars) and description length (≤ 200 chars) before proceeding. If either fails, suggest a fix.
Question 4: Key Content (Q4/5)
This question adapts based on skill type from Q2:
For component skills:
"What are the core elements of this artifact or framework? I need:
- The template or structure — What sections/fields does it contain?
- Quality criteria — What separates a good one from a bad one?
- One concrete example — A filled-in version showing it done well
Give me whatever you have — bullet points, rough notes, or a full draft."
For interactive skills:
"Walk me through the conversation flow:
- What's the opening question? — What does the user need to tell you first?
- What are the 2-4 branching paths? — How do answers change what comes next?
- What recommendations emerge? — What are the 3-5 outcomes you'd offer?
Give me the decision tree as you see it — even if it's rough."
For workflow skills:
"Map out the phases:
- What are the major steps? (Usually 3-6 phases)
- What's the input and output of each phase?
- Which existing skills does this reference? (Search your existing skills for any that already cover this topic before proceeding.)
- Where are the decision points?
Give me the flow — sequential, branching, or both."
Question 5: Pitfalls and Edge Cases (Q5/5)
Agent asks:
"What goes wrong when people do this badly? I need 2-3 failure modes:
- Name the failure — Give it a label (e.g., 'Metrics Theater', 'Hero Syndrome')
- Describe the consequence — What happens when someone falls into this trap?
- State the fix — What's the corrective action?
If you're not sure, tell me the most common mistake you've seen and I'll help structure it."
Draft Generation
After collecting answers to Q1-Q5, the agent generates a complete SKILL.md draft including:
- YAML frontmatter —
name,description,intent,type,best_for,scenarios,estimated_time - Purpose — Synthesized from Q1 + Q3
- Key Concepts — Structured from Q4 content
- Application — Step-by-step instructions derived from Q4
- Examples — Concrete example from Q4 (or generated if not provided)
- Common Pitfalls — Structured from Q5
- References — Related skills identified during conversation + source material
Agent says after generating:
"Here's your draft SKILL.md. Before we call it done:
- Review the draft — Does it capture your intent?
- Validate the frontmatter — Confirm
nameanddescriptionare present and within limits (name ≤ 64 chars kebab-case, description ≤ 200 chars with a "Use when..." trigger cue). - Confirm structure and triggers — Verify all required sections are present and the description/triggers would actually match real user requests.
- Check for overlap — Make sure this doesn't duplicate an existing skill.
Want me to adjust anything, or are you ready to validate?"
Examples
Example: Framework → Component Skill
Q1: "1 — A framework. It's a 2x2 matrix for evaluating build-vs-buy decisions."
Q2: "1 — Yes, component."
Q3: "Name: build-vs-buy-matrix. Description: 'Evaluate build-vs-buy decisions using a 2x2 matrix of strategic value and implementation complexity. Use when choosing between building internally and buying a solution.'"
Q4: "The axes are strategic differentiation (low/high) and implementation complexity (low/high). Four quadrants: Buy (low/low), Partner (low/high), Build (high/low), Invest (high/high). Quality criteria: each quadrant has a clear decision rule and one example."
Q5: "Biggest mistake: treating it as a one-time decision. Consequence: you build something, market shifts, and you're stuck maintaining undifferentiated tech. Fix: revisit quarterly."
Output: Complete component skill with template, filled example, and the quarterly-review pitfall.
Example: Advisory Topic → Interactive Skill
Q1: "4 — Coaching topic. Helping PMs navigate their first pricing conversation with leadership."
Q2: "1 — Yes, interactive."
Q3: "Name: pricing-conversation-advisor. Description: 'Prepare for your first pricing conversation with leadership. Use when presenting pricing changes or new monetization to executives.'"
Q4: "Opening question: What's the pricing change? Branches: new product pricing, price increase on existing, freemium-to-paid conversion, usage-based transition. Recommendations: data to bring, objection handling, framing strategies."
Q5: "Failure mode: 'Leading with the Number.' Consequence: executives fixate on the price point instead of the strategy. Fix: always lead with the business case and customer impact before revealing the number."
Output: Complete interactive skill with 3-question flow, 4 branches, and enumerated recommendations per branch.
Anti-Pattern: Scope Creep
Q1: "I want a skill that covers all of product strategy — vision, roadmaps, OKRs, prioritization, stakeholder alignment, and metrics."
Agent response: "That's 4-6 separate skills, not one. Let's pick the one that matters most right now and build that. Which piece is most urgent?
- Vision → component skill
- Roadmap planning → workflow skill (already exists:
roadmap-planning) - Prioritization → interactive skill (already exists:
prioritization-advisor) - Something else
Start with one. We can build the others after."
Common Pitfalls
Pitfall 1: Type Confusion
Symptom: Calling something a "workflow" when it's really a template with numbered steps.
Consequence: Over-engineered skill that references non-existent sub-skills and confuses users.
Fix: Apply the type decision questions from Q2 honestly. If it doesn't orchestrate other skills or have distinct phases with different inputs/outputs, it's probably a component.
Pitfall 2: Description That Doesn't Trigger
Symptom: Description says what the skill is ("A framework for pricing decisions") but not when to use it.
Consequence: Claude can't match user requests to the skill. It sits unused.
Fix: Every description must answer "Use when..." — e.g., "Evaluate pricing decisions using a structured framework. Use when choosing between pricing models or preparing a pricing proposal."
Pitfall 3: Skipping Validation
Symptom: "The draft looks good, let's ship it."
Consequence: Broken frontmatter, missing sections, failed cross-references, inconsistent catalog counts.
Fix: Always validate the draft's frontmatter and confirm all required sections are present before considering the skill done. No exceptions.
Pitfall 4: Kitchen Sink Scope
Symptom: Trying to pack an entire domain into one skill.
Consequence: A 500-line monster that does nothing well. Too broad to trigger accurately, too long to be useful.
Fix: One skill = one job. If you need more than 6 application steps or more than 4 branches, you probably need multiple skills.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most skill authoring skills give in ~3.0k tokens
Counted across 408 of the 422 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06
- Keep SKILL.md under 500 linesin 118 of 408, across 104 files
- Write skill instructions in imperative formin 44 of 408, across 37 files
- Move detailed reference material into references filesin 41 of 408, across 34 files
- Run init_skill.py to initialize new skillsin 40 of 408, across 33 files
- Draft assertions while test runs are in progressin 32 of 408, across 25 files
- Keep description under 1024 charactersin 31 of 408, across 18 files
- Run package_skill.py once the skill is completein 29 of 408, across 23 files
- Spawn with-skill and baseline runs in the same turnin 28 of 408, across 21 files
- Test added scripts by actually running themin 27 of 408, across 21 files
- Follow the creation steps in orderin 24 of 408, across 17 files
- Generate the eval viewer before evaluating outputs yourselfin 24 of 408, across 17 files
- Write the description in third personin 24 of 408, across 18 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Ask one question per turn and wait
- Offer numbered options with a recommended default
- Label progress on each question
- Present numbered recommendations at decision points
- Validate name kebab-case and description length
- Validate the draft before considering it done
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.