$intent

# Product intent

Turn the request into a decision the product must support. Use the user's language and existing brief before inventing a new framing.

## Work

- Identify the user, situation, current workaround, desired outcome, and business constraint. Separate evidence from assumptions.
- Trace one complete job from entry to a useful result. A list of screens is not a workflow.
- Set the smallest useful scope, explicit exclusions, and the question the next artifact should answer. Preserve features the user explicitly requested; explain tradeoffs before proposing alternatives.
- For existing work, compare the actual journey to the original promise. Keep what serves it, identify drift, and recommend a bounded correction.
- Ask only questions whose answers change scope or consequence. Continue with labeled, reversible assumptions where possible. Do not require an interview before a well-specified implementation task.

## Deliver

A compact brief: **user and situation → outcome → first workflow → scope → constraints → uncertainty → next action**. Use a short paragraph or table; omit empty categories. Include an observable acceptance condition without inventing research or targets.

Follow this shape:

**Concept:** ...
**User/situation:** ...
**Outcome:** ...
**First workflow:** ...
**Scope in / out:** ...
**Constraints/risks:** ...
**Assumptions / open questions:** ...
**Acceptance check:** ...
**Next artifact:** ...

Example: a crew member needs tomorrow's site assignment on a phone. Test whether they can find it and recognize a last-minute change. Offline access is a requirement to resolve, not a feature to assume.

Check that someone could use the brief to reject an attractive but irrelevant screen. For testable behavior use `$requirements`; for the cheapest useful artifact use `$prototype`. These are optional next steps, not mandatory prerequisites.

## Worked example

**Concept:** Shared calendar for small construction crews so everyone knows which site they are on.
**User/situation:** Foremen assign crews in a WhatsApp group; crew members check phones on site, often on low-end Android without reliable connectivity.
**Outcome:** Everyone knows where they work tomorrow without asking anyone.
**First workflow:** Foreman creates the week's assignments → crew member opens today's view in under 10 seconds.
**Scope in:** Weekly assignment view per user and per site; foreman-only editing; notification on change.
**Scope out:** Time tracking, payroll, GPS check-in.
**Constraints/risks:** Low-end devices; intermittent connectivity; crews under 15 people.
**Assumptions / open questions:** Assume one foreman per crew; resolve whether assignments need recurring patterns or integration with an existing tool.
**Acceptance check:** A crew member finds tomorrow's site and recognizes a last-minute change; offline access is a resolved requirement, not an assumed feature.
**Next artifact:** `$requirements` for the assignment workflow.

## Gotchas

- Do not list screens when the brief needs one complete job from entry to result.
- Do not replace user-requested features with preferred alternatives without explaining tradeoffs.
- Do not demand a full interview before a well-specified implementation task; proceed with labeled assumptions.
- Do not invent research numbers or success targets in the acceptance check.
- Do not reframe the product after a slice exists; compare running work to the brief instead.

## Boundaries

- Do not use when intent is clear and the question is build polish — use `$prototype` instead.
- Do not use when an agreed brief needs testable behavior — use `$requirements` instead.
- Do not invent a new product after a slice exists; compare the running slice to the brief and list keep / fix / defer.

npx skills add mattjmdesign/dengskills --skill intent