prd-v05-risk-discovery-interview

# Risk Discovery Interview

Position in workflow: v0.4 Screen Flow Definition → **v0.5 Risk Discovery Interview** → v0.5 Technical Stack Selection

This is an **interactive interview skill**. The AI asks questions, the user reflects and decides. The goal is to surface risks so the user can mitigate or accept them—not to kill ideas.

## Consumes

This skill requires prior work from v0.1-v0.4:

- **CFD-\* all customer feedback entries** (from v0.1-v0.2) — User research foundation; reveals confidence tier in market assumptions
- **BR-\* all business rules** (from v0.2-v0.3) — Constraints on what can change (pricing, moat, product type constrain risk responses)
- **FEA-\* feature entries** (from v0.3) — Feature complexity and priorities signal technical risks
- **PER-\* persona entries** (from v0.4) — Persona distribution and behaviors reveal adoption risks and churn signals
- **UJ-\* journey entries** (from v0.4) — Journey complexity signals friction points; long journeys increase adoption risk
- **SCR-\* screen entries** (from v0.4) — Screen count and design complexity informs technical resource risk

This skill assumes v0.1-v0.4 work is complete and serves as context for interview discovery.

## Produces

This skill creates/updates:

- **RISK-\* entries** (risk discovery, owner-assigned severity) — Identified risks with Impact/Likelihood scoring (raw score from 1-9), response type (Mitigate/Accept/Avoid/Transfer), specific mitigations, and owners
- **README Risk Scorecard** — Baseline risk profile aggregated by category (Market/User/Technical) with total scores and risk level assessment
- **Risk mitigation summary** — Top 3-5 risks requiring active mitigation before v0.6 architecture work

All RISK- entries are created through user decision during the interview; they reflect explicit owner choices on severity, not AI assumptions:

Example RISK- entry (user-scored):
```markdown
RISK-001: Market — Competitor Feature Parity
Description: Competitor X launches report scheduling feature (our FEA-003 planned) within 60 days
Trigger: Competitor announces roadmap; sees our landing page
Impact: High (3) — User severity assessment based on competitive urgency
Likelihood: Medium (2) — User assessment of competitor execution speed
Raw Score: 6 (3 × 2)
Status: open
Effective Score: 6.0

Early Signal: Competitor job postings for feature area, beta announcement
Response: Mitigate
Mitigation: Accelerate FEA-003 launch by 30 days; add scheduling as P0 (links to FEA-003, KPI-002)
Owner: Product Lead
Linked IDs: FEA-003 (report scheduling), KPI-002 (activation rate), BR-042 (undercut positioning)
Review Date: Weekly during v0.6 (architecture phase)
Added: v0.5
```

Note: Confidence scores are NOT part of RISK- entries. Risks are binary facts (discovered or not); severity is user-decided. Confidence applies to CFD-/FEA-/KPI- entries, not risks.

## Design Principles

1. **Interview, not inquisition** — Facilitate discovery, don't interrogate
2. **Inform, not kill** — Surface risks so user can mitigate, not abandon
3. **User owns decisions** — AI facilitates, user assigns severity and response
4. **Actionable outputs** — Every risk has a mitigation path or explicit "accept"

## Risk Categories

### Discovery Categories (Interview Prompts)

| Category | Focus Area | Example Questions |
|----------|------------|-------------------|
| **Market** | Competitors, timing, demand | "What if [competitor] launches this feature next month?" |
| **Technical** | Complexity, unknowns, dependencies | "Which feature has the most technical uncertainty?" |
| **Adoption** | User behavior, activation, retention | "What's the biggest friction point in onboarding?" |
| **Resource** | Team, budget, time | "If you had to cut scope by 50%, what stays?" |
| **Dependency** | External factors, integrations, partners | "What external factor could block launch?" |
| **Timing** | Deadlines, market windows, seasonality | "Is there a deadline we must hit? Why?" |

### Scoring Categories (README Scorecard)

Each RISK- entry maps to one of 3 scoring categories for the README Risk Scorecard:

| Scoring Category | Discovery Categories | Measures |
|---|---|---|
| **Market** | Market, Timing | Will anyone buy this? |
| **User** | Adoption, Dependency | Will users succeed with this? |
| **Technical** | Technical, Resource | Can we build and run this? |

## Interview Flow

### Phase 1: Context Review
Before asking questions, AI reviews:
- CFD- evidence from v0.1-v0.2
- FEA- features and their priorities
- UJ- journeys and their complexity
- BR- business rules and constraints

### Phase 2: Guided Questions
Ask questions from each category, adapting based on product context:

**Market Risks:**
- "What happens if [competitor] launches something similar in 60 days?"
- "What market assumption are you least confident about?"
- "What would cause users to choose a competitor instead?"

**Technical Risks:**
- "Which feature has the most technical uncertainty?"
- "What technology choice are you least confident about?"
- "Is there anything you've never built before?"

**Adoption Risks:**
- "What's the biggest friction point in [UJ-001 onboarding journey]?"
- "What behavior change are you asking users to make?"
- "What would cause a user to churn in the first week?"

**Resource Risks:**
- "If you had only 2 developers, what would you cut?"
- "What skill does the team lack?"
- "What's your runway for validation?"

**Dependency Risks:**
- "What external API or service could break your product?"
- "What partner relationship is critical?"
- "What regulatory requirement could block launch?"

**Timing Risks:**
- "Is there a hard deadline? What happens if you miss it?"
- "Is there a market window closing?"
- "What seasonal factor affects launch timing?"

### Phase 3: Risk Documentation
For each identified risk, create RISK- entry with user input on severity and response.

### Phase 4: Priority & Review
- Force-rank risks by Impact × Likelihood
- Identify top 3-5 that