# Product Strategy Review

> Challenge an unvalidated product idea using demand evidence, target users, assumptions, alternatives, and the smallest valuable wedge. Do not use after scope is accepted.

- Skill: `egeetas/product-strategy-review` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add egeetas/product-strategy-review`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/egeetas/product-strategy-review/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: egeetas (https://skillmd.com/u/egeetas)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/egeetas/product-strategy-review

---


# Product Strategy Review

Use this skill before `product-requirements` when the main risk is building the wrong thing rather than implementing it incorrectly. Preserve the user's ownership of product decisions; challenge assumptions without turning the review into a pitch or silently changing the idea.

## Choose the Review Depth

- **Discovery:** the idea is early, the target user or problem is uncertain, or demand has not been tested.
- **Challenge:** a proposal exists and needs an adversarial premise, scope, and alternative review.
- **Focused:** the user named one decision; investigate only the evidence needed for that decision.

Do not force a long interview when repository context or supplied research already answers a question. Ask only questions whose answers can change the recommendation.

## Investigate

1. Identify the named user, their job to be done, the triggering situation, and the cost of the current problem.
2. Establish the status quo: workaround, incumbent product, manual process, or choosing not to act.
3. Separate evidence from inference. Label important claims as `observed`, `user-stated`, `inferred`, or `unknown`.
4. Test demand quality: frequency, urgency, existing spend or effort, access to users, and evidence stronger than compliments.
5. Find the narrowest wedge that produces a complete outcome for a specific user without requiring the full vision.
6. If the current market, competitors, pricing, or platform behavior affects the decision, verify it from current primary sources.

## Challenge the Premises

Create a short premise ledger for assumptions that could invalidate the proposal:

| Premise | Current evidence | What would falsify it | How to test cheaply |
|---|---|---|---|

Include product, distribution, workflow, technical, trust, and operational premises only when material. Do not manufacture objections for completeness.

Generate at least two materially different paths when alternatives are useful. Consider a smaller wedge, integration, service/manual approach, buying or extending an existing tool, and doing nothing. Cosmetic variations of the same implementation are not alternatives.

## Decision Brief

Return:

- problem, target user, and triggering context;
- demand evidence and the strongest uncertainty;
- status quo and why it is or is not sufficient;
- critical premises and cheapest validation experiments;
- alternatives with trade-offs;
- recommended wedge, explicit non-goals, and success signal;
- open decisions that require the user rather than the agent.

If the recommendation is to proceed, hand the accepted direction to `product-requirements`. Do not implement, file issues, contact users, spend money, or make external changes unless separately requested and authorized.