Product review

Skill Uxcel-Lab/product-skills/pm/workflows/product-review

Expert UX design and product management skills for AI assistants, built from the Uxcel learning library.

Install

npx -y skills add Uxcel-Lab/product-skills --skill product-review

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

3 stars3 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Orchestrated review of a PM artifact (spec, PRD, OKRs, roadmap, prioritization, strategy). Routes by artifact type to the right audits, auto-runs the always-relevant assumption check, and returns one prioritized report. Trigger when the user asks for a full review of a PM document, "review my spec/roadmap/OKRs", "is this PRD solid", or general PM feedback — but NOT when they name a single specific audit.

The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.

SKILL.md

4.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Product Review (PM Orchestrator) Skill

How this skill behaves (read first)

This is the front door for holistic PM-artifact review. It is the executable form of docs/orchestration-policy.md applied to PM work: it routes by artifact type to the relevant audits rather than firing all of them, auto-runs the one always-relevant lens (assumption rigor), and returns one prioritized report.

PM work has no "design system" suppression case, but it has the same two failures to avoid: a vague "looks good" review, and forcing every PM audit onto a document that only needs one.

When NOT to use this skill: if the user named a specific audit ("run spec-quality", "check my OKR metric validity"), skip this orchestrator and invoke that one directly. Explicit scope overrides orchestration.

Step 0 — Establish context (once)

Artifact type — spec/PRD, OKRs/KPIs, roadmap, prioritization, vision/strategy, GTM. This is the primary router. Infer it from the document; ask only if genuinely ambiguous.
Primary goal — what decision this artifact is meant to support (used for conflict resolution and prioritization).

Step 1 — Auto-run the always-relevant lens (Tier A)

pm-assumption-rigor-audit — runs whenever the artifact rests on unproven assumptions, which is nearly always true for PM work. It's cheap, high-leverage, and artifact-agnostic.

Each audit is named by its installable skill name. Invoke one only if that skill is installed; if one isn't, list it under "available but not run" in the report and don't block — this orchestrator degrades to whichever audits are present.

Step 2 — Route by artifact type (Tier B — run the matching one, offer adjacent ones)

Artifact	Primary audit	Adjacent lenses to offer
Spec / PRD	`pm-spec-quality-audit`	`pm-assumption-rigor-audit` (auto), `pm-decision-quality-audit`
OKRs / KPIs / metrics	`pm-okr-metric-validity-audit`	`pm-assumption-rigor-audit` (auto)
Roadmap / prioritization	`pm-prioritization-rigor-audit`	`pm-decision-quality-audit`, `pm-assumption-rigor-audit` (auto)
Vision / strategy	`pm-decision-quality-audit`	`pm-assumption-rigor-audit` (auto)
GTM plan	`pm-decision-quality-audit`	`pm-assumption-rigor-audit` (auto)

Run the primary audit for the artifact type. Offer the adjacent lenses rather than firing them: "This is a roadmap, so I ran prioritization-rigor and the assumption check. Want me to also run a decision-quality pass?"

Step 3 — Merge into one prioritized report

De-duplicate across lenses, resolve conflicts toward the primary goal from Step 0, and output a single severity-ordered list:

## Product Review — [artifact]
Context: [artifact type · primary goal]
Lenses run: [spec-quality, assumption-rigor]   Available but not run: [decision-quality]

### Critical
- [Issue] — what's wrong → fix. (spec-quality / assumption / metric-validity / …)
### Major
- …
### Minor
- …
### Working well ✓
- …

**Top 3 priorities:** the highest-impact fixes across all lenses.
Offered, not run: decision-quality — say the word and I'll add it.

Common do/don't patterns

❌ Don't	✅ Do
Run every PM audit on any document	Route by artifact type; auto-run only the assumption check
Return one report per audit	Merge into a single prioritized, de-duplicated list
Run this orchestrator when the user asked for one named audit	Defer to that audit directly (explicit scope wins)
Treat strategy and a spec the same way	Route: spec → spec-quality, OKRs → metric-validity, roadmap → prioritization-rigor

Relationship to the policy

This skill is docs/orchestration-policy.md in executable form for PM work. If the two ever diverge, the policy governs; update this skill to match it.

Source lessons (Uxcel)

This is an orchestrator — its substance lives in the audits it routes to. See the source lessons in each: pm-assumption-rigor-audit, pm-spec-quality-audit, pm-okr-metric-validity-audit, pm-prioritization-rigor-audit, pm-decision-quality-audit.