professional-brain
Maintain a durable, local markdown memory ('brain') of your product context, decisions, hypotheses, and stakeholders that other skills read from and write back to. Use when asked to set up a brain, ingest notes/artifacts into memory, recall what's known about a topic, log a decision with provenance, or run a weekly brain review. Produces a structured brain/ folder (knowledge, decisions, hypotheses, stakeholders, entities, source) with provenance-tagged facts, plus ingest/recall/record/review operations with approval-gated, append-only write-back.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills /tmp/professional-brain && cp -r /tmp/professional-brain/plugins/pm-cross/skills/professional-brain ~/.claude/skills/professional-brainSKILL.md
# Professional Brain Skill > 🚀 **New to this? Start with the [5-minute Quickstart](../../BRAIN_QUICKSTART.md)** — a folder + one file, with a worked example. This file is the full reference. Most skills start cold — you paste the same context every time, and decisions made six weeks ago lose the *why*. This skill gives the library a **memory**: a plain-markdown `brain/` folder on disk that skills read before they answer and write to after. No vector DB, no cloud — just grep-able files you (and Claude) can audit and edit. This is the **state layer** of an AI teammate. Pair it with the action layer (skills that file tickets / open PRs) and you get a loop: *recall → do the work → record the decision → review.* ## What This Skill Produces - A scaffolded **`brain/` folder** with a fixed schema (see below). - **Provenance-tagged** knowledge — every claim says where it came from and how strong it is. - Four operations you can invoke: **init**, **ingest**, **recall**, **review**. - A standing contract other skills follow: *read the relevant brain files first; write durable outcomes (decisions, new facts, stakeholder asks) back.* ## Required Inputs Ask for these only if they aren't already on disk or in the request: - **Which operation** — `init`, `ingest`, `recall`, or `review` (default: infer from the ask). - For **ingest**: the artifact (a pasted note, a file path, a transcript) and what it's about. - For **recall**: the topic or question to answer from memory. - The **brain location** — default `./brain/` at the project root. ## The Brain Schema ``` brain/ context.md # who/what: product, ICP, metrics definitions, voice (supersedes pm-context.md) knowledge/ # durable facts — strategy.md, market.md, users.md, org.md decisions/ # one file per decision: what, why, alternatives rejected, reopen-when hypotheses/ # assumptions: statement, evidence, status (open/validated/invalidated) stakeholders/ # one file per person: asks, concerns, comms history entities/ # typed objects: features, accounts, experiments — the artifact graph source/ # immutable originals (audit trail) — never edited after capture ``` It is Obsidian-vault compatible: open `brain/` as a vault and the links become a graph. ## Provenance Tags (the trust mechanism) Every fact carries a tag in square brackets so its strength is explicit. Skills must keep the tag when they reuse a fact, and **downgrade confidence for weak tags**. | Tag | Means | Strength | |---|---|---| | `[data]` | from analytics / a metric / a measured result | strong | | `[interview]` | from a documented user or customer interview | strong | | `[external]` | from third-party / market research | medium | | `[verbal]` | said in a meeting, not independently documented | weak | | `[hunch]` | informed intuition, no evidence yet | weakest | Example: `Mobile drives 65% of DAU [data]. Enterprise wants SSO before renewing [verbal].` ## Operations **init** — Create the folder schema. Migrate an existing `pm-context.md` into `context.md`. Offer to ingest any artifacts the user already has (Notion export, Jira CSV, notes). **ingest `<thing>`** — Store the original verbatim in `source/`, then synthesise it into the right durable file(s) (`knowledge/`, `decisions/`, `hypotheses/`, `stakeholders/`), tagging each extracted claim with its provenance. Never discard the source. **recall `<query>`** — Answer from memory. Use the helper script to find matching facts across the brain, then synthesise an answer that **cites each fact's file and tag**. If memory is thin, say so rather than inventing. **record** — The write-back half of the loop (Phase 1). After a skill produces an artifact (or on demand), extract the **durable outcomes** worth remembering — decisions made, new facts learned, assumptions surfaced, stakeholder asks — and propose them as a numbered list, each with its **target section** and **provenance tag**. This is the action surface, so it is **approval-gated and dry-run by default**: 1. **Propose** — show the records you'd write (section · tag · text). Preview with `brain_write.py …` (no `--commit`), which prints exactly what would be appended. 2. **Approve** — the user confirms, edits, or drops items. Never write without a yes. 3. **Append** — write the approved records with `--commit`. Append-only: decisions become a new numbered file; everything else appends to its named file. Nothing is overwritten. Downgrade weak evidence honestly — a conclusion from one call is `[interview]`, a gut call is `[hunch]`; don't launder it into `[data]`. **review** — Weekly sweep. Flag: stale hypotheses (open too long with no new evidence), decisions whose `reopen-when` condition now holds, contradictions between files, and facts that are only `[hunch]`/`[verbal]` but are being treated as settled. Draft the updates; don't apply silently. ## Programmatic Helper `scripts/brain_query.py` (stdlib only) does deterministic recall — it greps the brain for a query and returns matches with their file and detected provenance tag, so retrieval is transparent (no embeddings, no guessing). ```bash # Find what the brain knows about "activation", newest-first, as text python3 scripts/brain_query.py ./brain "activation" # JSON for chaining into another step python3 scripts/brain_query.py ./brain "enterprise SSO" --json ``` Use its output as the grounded evidence set, then synthesise the answer on top — never answer a recall from outside the brain without saying so. `scripts/brain_write.py` is the write-back counterpart — it **appends** a provenance-tagged record (append-only, never overwrites) and is **dry-run by default** so you can preview before committing: ```bash # Preview what would be written (changes nothing): python3 scripts/brain_write.py ./brain decisions "Prioritise mobile" --tag data --body "68% of churn is mobile" --source "Q3 analytics" # Write it after approval: python3 scripts/brain_write.py ./brain
Conduct a structured ethical review of an AI or ML feature, model, or product. Use when preparing to deploy an AI system, assessing algorithmic risk, auditing a model for bias, or producing a responsible AI impact assessment. Produces a structured ethics review covering fairness, transparency, privacy, safety, accountability, and societal impact with a risk tier score, pre-deployment checklist, and prioritised mitigations.
Structure AI and ML product decisions with the rigour of any product decision. Use when building AI-powered features, evaluating LLM integrations, designing AI products, or assessing AI readiness. Produces a complete AI product canvas covering problem definition, model approach, data requirements, evaluation framework, UX design, responsible AI checklist, and launch monitoring plan.
Transform feature briefs into structured design briefs that give designers the context they need before opening Figma. Use when asked to write a design brief, create a design handoff, brief a designer on a new feature, or translate a PRD into design requirements. Produces a brief with user goal, emotional context, success criteria, constraints, edge cases, and out-of-scope boundaries.
Design statistically rigorous A/B tests and interpret experiment results. Use when asked to design an experiment, run an A/B test, calculate sample size, interpret test results, or assess whether an experiment was successful. Produces a complete experiment design with hypothesis, sample size, run time, success criteria, and risk flags — or a results interpretation with ship/iterate/kill recommendation.
Synthesises user signals from multiple research sources into a unified, weighted insight brief. Use when you have data from interviews, support tickets, NPS verbatims, app reviews, or sales calls and need to reconcile contradictions, surface the underlying need behind requests, or answer 'what are users really telling us'. Produces ranked insights with confidence ratings, source weighting rationale, divergent signal analysis by user segment, and a research gap identification section.
Structure a product data analysis, metric deep-dive, funnel analysis, or cohort study. Use when asked to analyse product metrics, investigate a drop in conversion, explain a data change to stakeholders, or find the root cause of a metric movement. Produces a structured analysis with question, root cause, confidence level, and recommended action.
Interpret product metrics against goals and surface actionable signals. Use when asked to analyse product health, review key metrics, investigate a performance issue, produce a health report, or assess product-market fit signals. Produces a structured health report with RAG status, trend analysis, root cause hypotheses, and prioritised actions.
Structure a retention analysis, churn investigation, or engagement deep-dive for any product team. Use when asked to analyse user retention, investigate churn, measure DAU/MAU, or build a retention improvement plan. Produces a retention snapshot with root cause hypotheses, aha-moment correlation, and prioritised interventions.