Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

discovery-interview-prep发现面试准备

Agent Skill

discovery-interview-prep 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

19,928

周安装

856

GitHub Stars

3,890

下载量

6,985
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:discovery-interview-prep(发现面试准备)
来源仓库:https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-skills
仓库路径:skills/discovery-interview-prep
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-skills --skill discovery-interview-prep
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-skills --skill discovery-interview-prep

简介

基于研究目标和约束条件的结构化发现访谈计划以及自适应方法选择。

  • 指导产品经理通过四个适应性问题来定义研究目标、目标细分、访问限制和访谈方法
  • 生成定制的面试框架,其中包含 5 个以上特定于上下文的问题、后续行动以及针对每种方法的避免偏见指南(妈妈测试、待完成工作、切换面试、时间线映射)
  • 包括开场/结束脚本、专注于特定故事的成功标准和超过 5 次面试的模式检测以及招聘物流
  • 突出常见的陷阱(引导性问题、假设性问题、错误的受众、过早的结论)以及具体的修复方法

SKILL.md

Purpose

Guide product managers through preparing for customer discovery interviews by asking adaptive questions about research goals, customer segments, constraints, and methodologies. Use this to design effective interview plans, craft targeted questions, avoid common biases, and maximize learning from limited customer access—ensuring discovery interviews yield actionable insights rather than confirmation bias or surface-level feedback.

This is not a script generator—it's a strategic prep process that outputs a tailored interview plan with methodology, question framework, and success criteria.

Key Concepts

The Discovery Interview Prep Flow

An interactive process that:

  1. Gathers product/problem context (marketing materials, assumptions)
  2. Defines research goals (what you're trying to learn)
  3. Identifies target customer segment and access constraints
  4. Recommends interview methodology (Jobs-to-be-Done, problem validation, switch interviews, etc.)
  5. Generates interview framework with questions, biases to avoid, and success metrics

Why This Works

  • Goal-driven: Aligns interview approach to what you need to learn
  • Adaptive: Adjusts methodology based on product stage (idea vs. existing product) and access constraints
  • Bias-aware: Highlights common pitfalls (leading questions, confirmation bias, solution-first thinking)
  • Actionable: Outputs interview guide ready to use

Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)

  • Not a user testing script: Discovery = learning problems; testing = validating solutions
  • Not a sales demo: Don't pitch—listen and learn
  • Not surveys at scale: Deep qualitative interviews (5-10 people), not broad surveys (100+ people)

When to Use This

  • Starting product discovery (validating problem space)
  • Repositioning an existing product (understanding new market)
  • Investigating churn or drop-off (retention interviews)
  • Evaluating feature ideas before building
  • Preparing for customer development sprints

When NOT to Use This

  • User testing a prototype (use usability testing frameworks instead)
  • Quantitative research at scale (use surveys, analytics)
  • When you already know the problem (move to solution validation)

Facilitation Source of Truth

Use workshop-facilitation as the default interaction protocol for this skill.

It defines:

  • session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
  • one-question turns with plain-language prompts
  • progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
  • interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
  • numbered recommendations at decision points
  • quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include Other (specify) when useful)

This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.

Application

This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions, offering 3-4 enumerated options at each step.


Step 0: Gather Context (Before Questions)

Agent suggests:

Before we design your interview plan, let's gather context:

For Your Own Product (Existing or Planned):

  • Problem hypothesis or product concept description
  • Target customer segment (if known)
  • Existing research (support tickets, churn data, user feedback)
  • Product website or positioning materials
  • Key assumptions you're trying to validate

For Investigating an Existing Problem:

  • Customer complaints, support tickets, or churn reasons
  • Hypotheses about why customers leave or struggle
  • Competitive alternatives customers switch to

If Exploring a New Problem Space:

  • Find similar products or adjacent solutions
  • Copy competitor materials, customer reviews (G2, Capterra), or community discussions (Reddit, forums)
  • We'll use these to frame hypotheses

You can paste this content directly, or we can proceed with a brief description.


Question 1: Research Goal

Agent asks: "What's the primary goal of these discovery interviews? (What do you need to learn?)"

Offer 4 enumerated options:

  1. Problem validation — "Confirm that a problem exists and is painful enough to solve" (for new product ideas)
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done discovery — "Understand what customers are trying to accomplish and why current solutions fail" (for product strategy)
  3. Retention/churn investigation — "Figure out why customers leave or don't activate" (for existing products with churn issues)
  4. Feature prioritization — "Validate which problems/features matter most to customers" (for roadmap planning)

Or describe your own research goal (be specific: what question are you trying to answer?).

User response: [Selection or custom]


Question 2: Target Customer Segment

Agent asks: "Who are you interviewing? (Be as specific as possible.)"

Offer 4 enumerated options (adapted based on Q1):

Example (if Q1 = Problem validation):

  1. People who experience the problem regularly — E.g., "Small business owners who manually process invoices weekly" (high pain frequency)
  2. People who've tried to solve it — E.g., "Users who've tried 2+ competing solutions and churned" (understand failures)
  3. People in the target segment (regardless of problem awareness) — E.g., "All freelancers, even if they don't realize invoicing is a problem" (uncover latent needs)
  4. People who've recently experienced the problem — E.g., "Customers who churned in the last 30 days" (fresh memory)

Or describe your specific target segment (role, company size, behaviors, demographics).

Adaptation tip: Use personas or customer segments from provided materials.

User response: [Selection or custom]


Question 3: Constraints

Agent asks: "What constraints are you working with for these interviews?"

Offer 4 enumerated options:

  1. Limited access — "Can only interview 5-10 customers, need results in 2 weeks" (common for startups or fast timelines)
  2. Existing customer base — "Have 100+ active customers, can recruit easily" (mature product advantage)
  3. Cold outreach required — "No existing customers; need to recruit from scratch via LinkedIn, ads, or communities" (new product challenge)
  4. Internal stakeholders only — "Can interview sales/support teams who talk to customers daily" (proxy research, less ideal but pragmatic)

Or describe your specific constraints (budget, time, access, team capacity).

User response: [Selection or custom]


Question 4: Interview Methodology

Agent asks: "Based on your goal ([Q1]), target segment ([Q2]), and constraints ([Q3]), here are recommended interview methodologies:"

Offer 3-4 enumerated options (context-aware based on Q1-Q3):

Example (if Q1 = Problem validation, Q2 = People who experience problem regularly, Q3 = Limited access):

  1. Problem validation interviews (Mom Test style) — Ask about past behavior, not hypotheticals. Focus on: "Tell me about the last time you [experienced the problem]. What did you try? What happened?" (Best for: Validating if problem is real and painful)
  2. Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) interviews — Focus on what customers are trying to accomplish, not what they want. Ask: "What were you trying to get done? What alternatives did you consider? What made you choose X?" (Best for: Understanding motivations and switching behavior)
  3. Switch interviews — Interview customers who recently switched from a competitor or alternative. Ask: "What prompted you to look for a new solution? What was the 'push' away from the old tool? What 'pulled' you to try ours?" (Best for: Understanding competitive positioning and unmet needs)
  4. Timeline/journey mapping interviews — Walk through their entire experience chronologically. Ask: "Walk me through the first time you encountered this problem. What happened next? How did you try to solve it?" (Best for: Uncovering full context and pain points)

Choose a number, combine approaches (e.g., '1 & 2'), or describe your own methodology.

Adaptation examples:

  • If Q1 = Retention/churn → Prioritize "Exit interviews" or "Switch interviews (away from your product)"
  • If Q1 = Feature prioritization → Prioritize "Opportunity solution tree interviews" or "Kano model interviews"
  • If Q3 = Internal stakeholders only → Add caveat: "Proxy research (talking to sales/support) is better than nothing, but validate with real customers ASAP"

User response: [Selection or custom]


Output: Generate Interview Plan

After collecting responses, the agent generates a tailored interview plan:

# Discovery Interview Plan

**Research Goal:** [From Q1]
**Target Segment:** [From Q2]
**Constraints:** [From Q3]
**Methodology:** [From Q4]

---

## Interview Framework

### Opening (5 minutes)
- **Build rapport:** "Thanks for taking the time. I'm [name], and I'm researching [problem space]. This isn't a sales call—I'm here to learn from your experience."
- **Set expectations:** "I'll ask about your experiences with [topic]. There are no right answers. Feel free to be honest—critical feedback is most helpful."
- **Get consent:** "Is it okay if I take notes / record this conversation?"

---

### Core Questions (30-40 minutes)

**Based on your methodology ([Q4]), here are suggested questions:**

#### [Methodology Name] Questions:

1. **[Question 1]** — [Rationale for asking this]
   - **Follow-up:** [Dig deeper with...]
   - **Avoid:** [Don't ask leading version like...]

2. **[Question 2]** — [Rationale]
   - **Follow-up:** [...]
   - **Avoid:** [...]

3. **[Question 3]** — [Rationale]
   - **Follow-up:** [...]
   - **Avoid:** [...]

4. **[Question 4]** — [Rationale]
   - **Follow-up:** [...]
   - **Avoid:** [...]

5. **[Question 5]** — [Rationale]
   - **Follow-up:** [...]
   - **Avoid:** [...]

**Example (if Methodology = Problem validation - Mom Test style):**

1. **"Tell me about the last time you [experienced this problem]."** — Gets specific, recent behavior (not hypothetical)
   - **Follow-up:** "What were you trying to accomplish? What made it hard? What did you try?"
   - **Avoid:** "Would you use a tool that solves this?" (leading, hypothetical)

2. **"How do you currently handle [this problem]?"** — Reveals workarounds, alternatives, pain intensity
   - **Follow-up:** "How much time/money does that take? What's frustrating about it?"
   - **Avoid:** "Don't you think that's inefficient?" (leading)

3. **"Can you walk me through what you did step-by-step?"** — Uncovers details, edge cases, context
   - **Follow-up:** "What happened next? Where did you get stuck?"
   - **Avoid:** "Was it hard?" (yes/no question, not useful)

4. **"Have you tried other solutions for this?"** — Reveals competitive landscape, unmet needs
   - **Follow-up:** "What did you like/dislike? Why did you stop using it?"
   - **Avoid:** "Would you pay for a better solution?" (hypothetical)

5. **"If you had a magic wand, what would change?"** — Opens space for ideal outcomes (but treat with skepticism—focus on past behavior, not wishes)
   - **Follow-up:** "Why does that matter to you? What would that enable?"
   - **Avoid:** Taking feature requests literally

---

### Closing (5 minutes)
- **Summarize:** "Just to recap, I heard that [key insights]. Did I get that right?"
- **Ask for referrals:** "Do you know anyone else who experiences this problem? Could you introduce me?"
- **Thank them:** "This was incredibly helpful. I really appreciate your time."

---

## Biases to Avoid

1. **Confirmation bias:** Don't ask "Don't you think X is a problem?" → Ask "Tell me about your experience with X."
2. **Leading questions:** Don't ask "Would you use this?" → Ask "What have you tried? Why did it work/fail?"
3. **Hypothetical questions:** Don't ask "If we built Y, would you pay?" → Ask "What do you currently pay for? Why?"
4. **Pitching disguised as research:** Don't say "We're building Z to solve X" → Say "I'm researching X. Tell me about your experience."
5. **Yes/no questions:** Don't ask "Is invoicing hard?" → Ask "Walk me through your invoicing process."

---

## Success Criteria

You'll know these interviews are successful if:

✅ **You hear specific stories, not generic complaints** — "Last Tuesday, I spent 3 hours..." vs. "Invoicing is annoying"
✅ **You uncover past behavior, not hypothetical wishes** — "I tried Zapier but quit after 2 weeks" vs. "I'd probably use automation"
✅ **You identify patterns across 3+ interviews** — Same pain points emerge independently
✅ **You're surprised by something** — If everything confirms your assumptions, you're asking leading questions
✅ **You can quote customers verbatim** — Actual language = authentic insights

---

## Interview Logistics

**Recruiting:**
- [Based on Q3 constraints, suggest recruitment channels]
- **Example (if Q3 = Limited access):** "Reach out to 20-30 people to get 5-10 interviews (33% response rate is typical)"
- **Example (if Q3 = Existing customers):** "Email 50 customers with $50 Amazon gift card incentive"

**Scheduling:**
- 45-60 minutes per interview (30-40 min conversation + buffer)
- Record if possible (with consent), or take detailed notes
- Schedule 2-3 per day max (you need time to synthesize)

**Synthesis:**
- After each interview, write key insights immediately (memory fades fast)
- After 5 interviews, look for patterns (common pains, jobs, workarounds)
- Use `problem-statement.md` to frame findings

---

**Ready to start recruiting and interviewing? Let me know if you'd like to refine any part of this plan.**

Examples

Example 1: Good Discovery Interview Prep (Problem Validation)

Step 0 - Context: User shares hypothesis: "Freelancers waste time chasing late payments manually."

Q1 Response: "Problem validation — Confirm that late payment follow-ups are painful enough to solve"

Q2 Response: "People who experience the problem regularly — Freelancers who invoice 5+ clients monthly"

Q3 Response: "Cold outreach required — No existing customers; need to recruit via LinkedIn, Reddit, freelancer communities"

Q4 Response: "Problem validation interviews (Mom Test style) — Focus on past behavior, not hypotheticals"

Generated Plan: Includes 5 Mom Test-style questions (last time you chased a late payment, how do you currently handle it, what have you tried, etc.), biases to avoid (leading questions, hypotheticals), and success criteria (specific stories, past behavior, patterns across 3+ interviews).

Why this works:

  • Goal is clear (validate if problem is real)
  • Segment is specific (freelancers with 5+ clients/month)
  • Methodology matches goal (Mom Test for validation)
  • Questions focus on past behavior, not wishes
  • Success criteria are measurable

Common Pitfalls

Pitfall 1: Asking What Customers Want

Symptom: "What features do you want us to build?"

Consequence: You get feature requests, not problems. Customers don't know solutions.

Fix: Ask about past behavior: "Tell me about the last time you struggled with X."


Pitfall 2: Pitching Instead of Listening

Symptom: Spending 20 minutes explaining your product idea

Consequence: Customer feels obligated to be nice. No honest feedback.

Fix: Don't mention your solution until the last 5 minutes (if at all). Focus on their problems.


Pitfall 3: Interviewing the Wrong People

Symptom: Interviewing friends, family, or people who don't experience the problem

Consequence: Polite feedback, not real insights.

Fix: Interview people who experience the problem regularly and recently.


Pitfall 4: Stopping at 1-2 Interviews

Symptom: "We talked to 2 people, they liked it, let's build!"

Consequence: Small sample = confirmation bias.

Fix: Interview 5-10 people minimum. Look for patterns, not one-off feedback.


Pitfall 5: Not Recording Insights

Symptom: Relying on memory after interviews

Consequence: Lose details, misremember quotes, can't spot patterns.

Fix: Record (with consent) or take detailed notes. Synthesize immediately after each interview.


References

Related Skills

  • problem-statement.md — Use interview insights to frame problem statement
  • proto-persona.md — Define interview target segment
  • jobs-to-be-done.md — JTBD methodology for interviews

External Frameworks

  • Rob Fitzpatrick, *The Mom Test* (2013) — How to ask good questions without biasing answers
  • Clayton Christensen, *Jobs to Be Done* — Interview methodology for understanding motivations
  • Teresa Torres, *Continuous Discovery Habits* (2021) — Opportunity solution tree interviews

Dean's Work

  • Problem Framing Canvas (synthesizes interview findings)

Skill type: Interactive Suggested filename: discovery-interview-prep.md Suggested placement: /skills/interactive/ Dependencies: Uses problem-statement.md, proto-persona.md, jobs-to-be-done.md

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

36%
按下载量换算2,515

Claude

30.94%
按下载量换算2,161

Cursor

19.02%
按下载量换算1,329

Gemini CLI

9.61%
按下载量换算671

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills