← Back to list
⚡

identify-assumptions-existing Checked

Identify risky assumptions for a feature idea in an existing product across Value, Usability, Via…
⚡ Productivity skills By phuryn Version v1.0.0 Added 2026-09-03 Updated 2026-09-03 Source ↗
7.7Overall rating
2Views
6Downloads
26.0kStars

Installation

🤖 Install via AI

Copy the prompt below and send it to your AI assistant (e.g. Claude Code) — it will follow the instructions and install automatically.

Install the "identify-assumptions-existing" skill by following the instructions at https://skill123.me/install/identify-assumptions-existing.
⌨️ Command line install

Run in your terminal — downloads and installs to ~/.claude/skills/.

curl -fsSL https://skill123.me/install/identify-assumptions-existing.sh | bash
📦 Download ZIP

Download the zip and extract it into your skills directory (e.g. ~/.claude/skills/), then restart your session.

⬇ Download v1.0.0 · 1 KB
📊 Static rating
7.7/10
Trigger
7.0
Structure
7.3
Workflow
6.4
Content
8.0
Engineering
9.0
Security
9.5

Six-dimension rubric with reviewer rationale.

View scorecard ↓
🛡 Dynamic test
—

Not live-tested yet — this skill is rated on static analysis only.

About this skill

Identify risky assumptions for a feature idea in an existing product across Value, Usability, Viability, and Feasibility. Uses multi-perspective devil's advocate thinking. Use when stress-testing a feature idea, doing risk assessment, or preparing for assumption mapping.

Documentation

Identify risky assumptions for a feature idea in an existing product across Value, Usability, Viability, and Feasibility. Uses multi-perspective devil's advocate thinking. Use when stress-testing a feature idea, doing risk assessment, or preparing for assumption mapping.

Identify Assumptions (Existing Product)

Devil's advocate analysis to surface risky assumptions across four risk areas.

### Context

You are stress-testing a feature idea for **$ARGUMENTS**.

If the user provides files (designs, PRDs, research), read them first.

### Instructions

The user will describe their product, objective, market segment, and feature idea. Work through these steps:

1. **Think from three perspectives** about why this feature might fail:

  • **Product Manager perspective**: Business viability, market fit, strategic alignment
  • **Designer perspective**: Usability, user experience, adoption barriers
  • **Engineer perspective**: Technical feasibility, performance, integration challenges

2. **Identify assumptions across four risk areas**:

  • **Value**: Will it create value for customers? Does it solve a real problem?
  • **Usability**: Will users figure out how to use it? Is the learning curve acceptable?
  • **Viability**: Can marketing, sales, finance, and legal support it?
  • **Feasibility**: Can it be built with existing technology? Are there integration risks?

3. **For each assumption**, note:

  • What specifically could go wrong
  • How confident you are (High/Medium/Low)
  • Suggested way to test it

Think step by step. Be thorough but constructive — the goal is to strengthen the idea, not kill it.

---

### Further Reading

Score breakdown

Trigger
7.0
Clear What/When with stress-test and risk-assessment keywords; no When-Not boundary or phrasing variants.
Structure
7.3
Single compact file with clean sections; no scripts or offloaded references.
Workflow
6.4
Reviewer pattern with perspectives, 4 risk areas and per-assumption confidence and test suggestion; no verification step.
Content
8.0
Concise imperative instructions with a clear tone guardrail (strengthen, not kill).
Engineering
9.0
Valid frontmatter, no scripts, no broken internal references.
Security
9.5
No scripts or injection; all external links to reputable productcompass.pm.
Effective devil-advocate reviewer skill with a 4-risk-area frame and confidence-plus-test schema per assumption, but no error handling or verification loop.