The weekly changelog email
A what-changed email that gets read instead of archived.
Текст промта
You are a product editor who writes changelogs people open twice. What shipped this week: {the raw list from your tracker} Who it goes to: {everyone / specific plans} Did anything break: {yes / no} Build: 1. Selection: what belongs in the email at all. Not everything — give the rule for telling a customer-facing change from an internal one. 2. Order: what leads. First comes the thing that changes someone's work, not the thing that took the most effort. 3. Each item: one line about what is now possible, not about what we did. "Added a date filter" is about us. "Any date range in two clicks" is about them. 4. Small things: gather them into one "odds and ends" block rather than stretching the email. 5. Fixes: how to write about something repaired without dwelling on it having been broken, and without hiding it. 6. Subject line: specific, drawn from the main change, never the word "update". 7. One link to an action the reader can take right now. 8. Length: how many phone screens this may occupy. Name the limit and hold it. Do not write "we are excited to announce". Nobody is interested in what excites you.
У фігурних дужках — те, що треба замінити на своє.
Приклад результату
Subject: "Any date range, two clicks" Lead: "Reports used to run by month only. Now you can pick any dates, including yesterday and the day before." Odds and ends: faster list loading, fixed CSV export with long names, restored sorting by status. Fixes: "People in two teams were getting duplicate notifications. They are not any more." Length: a screen and a half.
Схожі промти
Your idea broken down into risks plus a one-week test plan — before you spend months.
You are a product strategist who has seen plenty of projects die. Assess my SaaS idea honestly, without cheering me on. Idea: {what the service does} For whom: {who, as narrowly as possible} What the person does today without us: {how the job gets done now} How I plan to charge: {model and price} Time and money I can spend before first revenue: {resources} Break it down: 1. The problem: does it hurt regularly, or is it a one-off inconvenience? Answer plainly. 2. Who pays: the user themselves or their manager — and why that changes the product. 3. The three main risks: why this could fail. For each — the cheapest way to test it. 4. What already exists on the market, including a spreadsheet, a notebook and "do nothing" — count those as competitors too. 5. The most dangerous assumption: the one that makes everything else pointless if it's wrong. 6. A one-week test plan: what to do on which day to get a signal without writing code. 7. The kill criterion: what result means the idea should be dropped. If the idea is weak, say so in the first paragraph.
Показати приклад результатуСховати приклад
Most dangerous assumption: that the bookkeeper is allowed to change tools. The finance director decides, not them — so you sell "fewer reporting errors", not "more convenient". Kill criterion: if fewer than 3 out of 20 conversations end in "let me try it", drop the idea.
The smallest set of features you can already sell, plus what's deferred and why.
Help me draw the boundary of an MVP that can actually be shipped and sold. Product: {what the service does} The main scenario: {what the user does from login to result} Who the user is: {description} Time available for development: {timeframe} Who is building it: {one developer / a team / no-code} Do this: 1. One user path from sign-up to first value — step by step, no branches. 2. The features without which that path doesn't work. Each with a reason why it can't be dropped. 3. Features that feel mandatory but aren't needed in an MVP — and what replaces them for now (manual work, an email, a spreadsheet). 4. What to cut entirely, and why it won't stop you selling. 5. The boundaries: what the product does NOT do. Wordings for the site so nobody expects otherwise. 6. An estimate in weeks, broken down, with a note on where the estimate is least reliable. 7. What can be done by hand for the first few months instead of being automated. Rule: if a feature can be replaced by a human at launch, it does not belong in the MVP.
Показати приклад результатуСховати приклад
Do it by hand: PDF export is done by support on request for the first months. Three requests a week is one hour; automating it would have cost two weeks. Boundary for the site: "We don't replace your accountant — we prepare the data for them."
A feature turned into tasks with testable criteria — including errors and empty states.
Промт входить до PRO-добірки
Відкрити доступTables, relations and indexes derived from your scenarios — plus where the schema will strain.
Промт входить до PRO-добірки
Відкрити доступ