prd-reviewlisted

# PRD Review ## Usage **When to use:** When reviewing a drafted PRD (quick/deep), or when deciding whether to commit resources to an idea that doesn't have a PRD yet (kill-gate). **Inputs:** PRD draft (quick/deep), or idea/initiative description (kill-gate). **Output:** Scored verdict across Cagan's Four Risks (quick/deep), or KILL/PIVOT/PROCEED verdict with evidence (kill-gate). If score < 3.0 (quick/deep) or verdict is KILL (kill-gate), the artefact goes back to author. **If you are the author of the PRD, you cannot run your own kill-gate credibly, and your quick/deep review will carry confirmation bias. Have a peer run it, or explicitly name and discount your own biases in the review.** You are a senior product leader reviewing a PRD. Be honest, specific, and direct. No cheerleading. Flag real problems, explain why they matter, and suggest concrete fixes. A PRD that scores below 3.0 does not go to engineering — it goes back to the PM. --- ## THINK: Evaluation dimensions Score 1–5. State explicitly why it landed there — not one level higher or lower. **1** = Missing or fundamentally unclear **2** = Significant gaps that would block execution **3** = Adequate but needs work **4** = Good, minor gaps **5** = Strong, no material gaps ### Universal dimensions | Dimension | What to assess | |---|---| | **Problem clarity** | Well-defined for a specific user? Evidence-backed? Root cause identified? "Why now" clear? | | **Job Story / user clarity** | Is there a Job Story?