MCP HubMCP Hub
Volver a habilidades

pol-probe

deanpeters
Actualizado 2 days ago
3 vistas
4,511
575
4,511
Ver en GitHub
Metatestingdesign

Acerca de

La habilidad pol-probe ayuda a los desarrolladores a definir un artefacto de validación ligero y desechable para probar una hipótesis riesgosa de manera económica antes de comprometerse a construir software de producción. Está diseñada para sacar a la luz verdades duras y eliminar riesgos específicos sin la carga de un MVP. Úsala para misiones de reconocimiento sobre supuestos estrechos, donde la sonda está destinada a ser eliminada, no escalada.

Instalación rápida

Claude Code

Recomendado
Principal
npx skills add deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills -a claude-code
Comando PluginAlternativo
/plugin add https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills
Git CloneAlternativo
git clone https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills.git ~/.claude/skills/pol-probe

Copia y pega este comando en Claude Code para instalar esta habilidad

Documentación

Purpose

Define and document a Proof of Life (PoL) probe—a lightweight, disposable validation artifact designed to surface harsh truths before expensive development. Use this when you need to eliminate a specific risk or test a narrow hypothesis without building production-quality software. PoL probes are reconnaissance missions, not MVPs—they're meant to be deleted, not scaled.

This framework prevents prototype theater (expensive demos that impress stakeholders but teach nothing) and forces you to match validation method to actual learning goal.

Key Concepts

What is a PoL Probe?

A Proof of Life (PoL) probe is a deliberate, disposable validation experiment designed to answer one specific question as cheaply and quickly as possible. It's not a product, not an MVP, not a pilot—it's a targeted truth-seeking mission.

Origin: Coined by Dean Peters (Productside), building on Marty Cagan's 2014 work on prototype flavors and Jeff Patton's principle: "The most expensive way to test your idea is to build production-quality software."


The 5 Essential Characteristics

Every PoL probe must satisfy these criteria:

CharacteristicWhat It MeansWhy It Matters
LightweightMinimal resource investment (hours/days, not weeks)If it's expensive, you'll avoid killing it when the data says to
DisposableExplicitly planned for deletion, not scalingPrevents sunk-cost fallacy and scope creep
Narrow ScopeTests one specific hypothesis or riskBroad experiments yield ambiguous results
Brutally HonestSurfaces harsh truths, not vanity metricsPolite data is useless data
Tiny & FocusedReconnaissance missions, never MVPsSmall surface area = faster learning cycles

Anti-Pattern: If your "prototype" feels too polished to delete, it's not a PoL probe—it's prototype theater.


PoL Probe vs. MVP

DimensionPoL ProbeMVP
PurposeDe-risk decisions through narrow hypothesis testingJustify ideas or defend roadmap direction
ScopeSingle question, single riskSmallest shippable product increment
LifespanHours to days, then deletedWeeks to months, then iterated
AudienceInternal team + narrow user sampleReal customers in production
FidelityJust enough illusion to catch signalsProduction-quality (or close)
OutcomeLearn what doesn't workLearn what does work (and ship it)

Key Distinction: PoL probes are pre-MVP reconnaissance. You run probes to decide if you should build an MVP, not to launch something.


The 5 Prototype Flavors

Match the probe type to your hypothesis, not your tooling comfort.

TypeCore QuestionTimelineTools/MethodsWhen to Use
1. Feasibility Checks"Can we build this?"1-2 daysGenAI prompt chains, API tests, data integrity sweeps, spike-and-delete codeTechnical risk is unknown; third-party dependencies unclear
2. Task-Focused Tests"Can users complete this job without friction?"2-5 daysOptimal Workshop, UsabilityHub, task flowsCritical moments (field labels, decision points, drop-off zones) need validation
3. Narrative Prototypes"Does this workflow earn stakeholder buy-in?"1-3 daysLoom walkthroughs, Sora/Synthesia videos, slideware storyboardsYou need to "tell vs. test"—share the story, measure interest
4. Synthetic Data Simulations"Can we model this without production risk?"2-4 daysSynthea (user simulation), DataStax LangFlow (prompt logic testing)Edge case exploration; unknown-unknown surfacing
5. Vibe-Coded PoL Probes"Will this solution survive real user contact?"2-3 daysChatGPT Canvas + Replit + Airtable = "Frankensoft"You need user feedback on workflow/UX, but not production-grade code

Golden Rule: "Use the cheapest prototype that tells the harshest truth. If it doesn't sting, it's probably just theater."


When to Use a PoL Probe

Use a PoL probe when:

  • You have a specific, falsifiable hypothesis to test
  • A particular risk blocks your next decision (technical feasibility, user task completion, stakeholder support)
  • You need harsh truth fast (within days, not weeks)
  • Building production software would be premature or wasteful
  • You can articulate what "failure" looks like before you start

Don't use a PoL probe when:

  • You're trying to impress executives (that's prototype theater)
  • You already know the answer and just want validation (that's confirmation bias)
  • You can't articulate a clear hypothesis or disposal plan
  • The learning goal is too broad ("Will customers like this?")
  • You're using it to avoid making a hard decision

Application

Use template.md for the full fill-in structure.

PoL Probe Template

Use this structure to document your probe:

# PoL Probe: [Descriptive Name]

## Hypothesis
[One-sentence statement of what you believe to be true]
Example: "If we reduce the onboarding form to 3 fields, completion rate will exceed 80%."

## Risk Being Eliminated
[What specific risk or unknown are you addressing?]
Example: "We don't know if users will abandon signup due to form length."

## Prototype Type
[Select one of the 5 flavors]
- [ ] Feasibility Check
- [ ] Task-Focused Test
- [ ] Narrative Prototype
- [ ] Synthetic Data Simulation
- [x] Vibe-Coded PoL Probe

## Target Users / Audience
[Who will interact with this probe?]
Example: "10 users from our early access waitlist, non-technical SMB owners."

## Success Criteria (Harsh Truth)
[What truth are you seeking? What would prove you wrong?]
- **Pass:** 8+ users complete signup in under 2 minutes
- **Fail:** <6 users complete, or average time exceeds 5 minutes
- **Learn:** Identify specific drop-off fields

## Tools / Stack
[What will you use to build this?]
Example: "ChatGPT Canvas for form UI, Airtable for data capture, Loom for post-session interviews."

## Timeline
- **Build:** 2 days
- **Test:** 1 day (10 user sessions)
- **Analyze:** 1 day
- **Disposal:** Day 5 (delete all code, keep learnings doc)

## Disposal Plan
[When and how will you delete this?]
Example: "After user sessions complete, archive recordings, delete Frankensoft code, document learnings in Notion."

## Owner
[Who is accountable for running and disposing of this probe?]

## Status
- [ ] Hypothesis defined
- [ ] Probe built
- [ ] Users recruited
- [ ] Testing complete
- [ ] Learnings documented
- [ ] Probe disposed

Quality Checklist

Before launching your PoL probe, verify:

  • Lightweight: Can you build this in 1-3 days?
  • Disposable: Have you committed to a disposal date?
  • Narrow Scope: Does it test ONE hypothesis?
  • Brutally Honest: Will the data hurt if you're wrong?
  • Tiny & Focused: Is this smaller than an MVP?
  • Falsifiable: Can you describe what "failure" looks like?
  • Clear Owner: Is one person accountable for executing and disposing of this?

If any answer is "no," revise your probe or reconsider whether you need one.


Examples

See examples/sample.md for full PoL probe examples.

Mini example excerpt:

**Hypothesis:** Users can distinguish "archive" vs "delete"
**Probe Type:** Task-Focused Test
**Pass:** 80%+ correct interpretation

Common Pitfalls

  • Running a broad "will users like this?" experiment instead of testing one falsifiable hypothesis
  • Treating a PoL probe as a proto-MVP and refusing to dispose of it
  • Using vanity metrics that avoid uncomfortable truth
  • Skipping a pre-defined failure threshold before testing begins
  • Choosing tools first and hypothesis second

References

Related Skills

External Frameworks

  • Jeff PattonUser Story Mapping (lean validation principles)
  • Marty CaganInspired (2014 prototype flavors framework)
  • Dean PetersVibe First, Validate Fast, Verify Fit (Dean Peters' Substack, 2025)

Tools Mentioned

  • Feasibility: GenAI (ChatGPT, Claude), API testing tools
  • Task-Focused: Optimal Workshop, UsabilityHub
  • Narrative: Loom, Sora, Synthesia, Veo3 (text-to-video)
  • Synthetic Data: Synthea (patient simulation), DataStax LangFlow
  • Vibe-Coded: ChatGPT Canvas, Replit, Airtable, Carrd

Repositorio GitHub

deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills
Ruta: skills/pol-probe
0
ai-agentsai-product-managementclaude-skillspm-frameworksproduct-management

Habilidades relacionadas

content-collections

Meta

Esta habilidad proporciona una configuración probada en producción para Content Collections, una herramienta centrada en TypeScript que transforma archivos Markdown/MDX en colecciones de datos con tipado seguro mediante validación Zod. Úsala al construir blogs, sitios de documentación o aplicaciones Vite + React con mucho contenido para garantizar seguridad de tipos y validación automática de contenido. Abarca todo, desde la configuración del plugin de Vite y compilación MDX hasta la optimización de despliegue y validación de esquemas.

Ver habilidad

polymarket

Meta

Esta habilidad permite a los desarrolladores crear aplicaciones con la plataforma de mercados de predicción Polymarket, incluyendo la integración de API para operaciones y datos de mercado. También proporciona transmisión de datos en tiempo real a través de WebSocket para monitorear operaciones en vivo y actividad del mercado. Úsela para implementar estrategias de trading o crear herramientas que procesen actualizaciones de mercado en tiempo real.

Ver habilidad

creating-opencode-plugins

Meta

Esta habilidad ayuda a los desarrolladores a crear complementos de OpenCode que se conectan a más de 25 tipos de eventos, como comandos, archivos y operaciones LSP. Proporciona la estructura del complemento, las especificaciones de la API de eventos y los patrones de implementación para módulos en JavaScript/TypeScript. Úsala cuando necesites interceptar, monitorear o extender el ciclo de vida del asistente de IA de OpenCode con lógica personalizada basada en eventos.

Ver habilidad

sglang

Meta

SGLang es un framework de alto rendimiento para el servicio de LLM que se especializa en generación rápida y estructurada para JSON, expresiones regulares y flujos de trabajo de agentes utilizando su caché de prefijos RadixAttention. Ofrece una inferencia significativamente más rápida, especialmente para tareas con prefijos repetidos, lo que lo hace ideal para salidas complejas y estructuradas, y conversaciones multiturno. Elige SGLang sobre alternativas como vLLM cuando necesites decodificación restringida o estés construyendo aplicaciones con uso extensivo de prefijos compartidos.

Ver habilidad