MCP HubMCP Hub
스킬 목록으로 돌아가기

user-story

deanpeters
업데이트됨 Yesterday
2 조회
4,511
575
4,511
GitHub에서 보기
메타testing

정보

이 스킬은 Mike Cohn의 "As a... I want... So that..." 형식과 Gherkin 스타일의 수용 기준을 결합하여 사용자 스토리를 생성합니다. 사용자 요구사항을 명확한 결과와 검증 가능한 조건을 갖춘 개발 준비 작업으로 전환하도록 설계되었습니다. 요구사항을 실행 가능한 스토리로 변환하여 제품 팀과 엔지니어링 팀 간의 공유된 이해를 보장해야 할 때 사용하세요.

빠른 설치

Claude Code

추천
기본
npx skills add deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills -a claude-code
플러그인 명령대체
/plugin add https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills
Git 클론대체
git clone https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills.git ~/.claude/skills/user-story

Claude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요

문서

Purpose

Create clear, concise user stories that combine Mike Cohn's user story format with Gherkin-style acceptance criteria. Use this to translate user needs into actionable development work that focuses on outcomes, ensures shared understanding between product and engineering, and provides testable success criteria.

This is not a feature spec—it's a conversation starter that captures who benefits, what they're trying to do, why it matters, and how you'll know it works.

Key Concepts

The Mike Cohn + Gherkin Format

A user story combines:

Use Case (Mike Cohn format):

  • As a [user persona/role]
  • I want to [action to achieve outcome]
  • so that [desired outcome]

Acceptance Criteria (Gherkin format):

  • Scenario: [Brief description of the scenario]
  • Given: [Initial context or preconditions]
  • and Given: [Additional preconditions]
  • When: [Event that triggers the action]
  • Then: [Expected outcome]

Why This Structure Works

  • User-centric: Forces focus on who benefits and why
  • Outcome-focused: "So that" emphasizes the value delivered, not just the action
  • Testable: Gherkin acceptance criteria are concrete and verifiable
  • Conversational: Story is the opening for discussion, not the final spec
  • Shared language: Product, engineering, and QA all understand the format

Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)

  • Not a task: "As a developer, I want to refactor the database" (this is a tech task, not user value)
  • Not a feature list: "I want dashboards, reports, and analytics" (this is too big—needs splitting)
  • Not vague: "I want a better experience" (unmeasurable, no clear outcome)
  • Not a contract: Stories are placeholders for conversation, not locked-in specs

When to Use This

  • Translating user needs into development work
  • Backlog grooming and sprint planning
  • Communicating value to engineering and design
  • Ensuring testable acceptance criteria exist before development

When NOT to Use This

  • For pure technical debt or refactoring (use engineering tasks instead)
  • When stories are too large (split first—see skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md)
  • Before understanding the user problem (write a problem statement first)

Application

Step 1: Gather Context

Before writing a story, ensure you have:

  • User persona: Who is this for? (reference skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md)
  • Problem understanding: What need does this address? (reference skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md)
  • Desired outcome: What does success look like?
  • Constraints: Technical, time, or scope limitations

If missing context: Run discovery interviews or problem validation work first.


Optional Helper Script (Template Generator)

If you want a consistent Markdown stub, you can generate one from CLI inputs. This script is deterministic and does not fetch data or write files.

python3 scripts/user-story-template.py --persona \"trial user\" --action \"log in with Google\" --outcome \"access the app without creating a new password\"

Step 2: Write the Use Case

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

Fill in the template:

### User Story [ID]:

- **Summary:** [Brief, memorable title focused on value to the user]

#### Use Case:
- **As a** [user name if available, otherwise persona, otherwise role]
- **I want to** [action user takes to get to outcome]
- **so that** [desired outcome]

Quality checks:

  • "As a" specificity: Is this a specific persona (e.g., "trial user") or generic ("user")?
  • "I want to" clarity: Is this an action the user takes, or a feature you're building?
  • "So that" outcome: Does this explain the user's motivation? Or is it just restating the action?

Common mistakes:

  • ❌ "As a user, I want a login button, so that I can log in" (restating the action)
  • ✅ "As a trial user, I want to log in with Google, so that I can access the app without creating a new password"

Step 3: Write the Acceptance Criteria

Fill in the template:

#### Acceptance Criteria:

- **Scenario:** [Brief, human-readable scenario describing value]
- **Given:** [Initial context or precondition]
- **and Given:** [Additional context or preconditions]
- **and Given:** [Additional context as needed]
- **and Given:** [UI-focused context ensuring 'When' can happen]
- **and Given:** [Outcomes-focused context ensuring 'Then' is delivered]
- **When:** [Event that triggers the action—aligns with 'I want to']
- **Then:** [Expected outcome—aligns with 'so that']

Quality checks:

  • Multiple Givens are okay: Preconditions stack up (e.g., "Given I'm logged in" + "Given I have items in my cart")
  • Only one When: If you need multiple "When" statements, you likely have multiple stories—split them
  • Only one Then: If you need multiple "Then" statements, you likely have multiple stories—split them
  • Alignment: Does "When" match "I want to"? Does "Then" match "so that"?

Red flags:

  • Multiple Whens/Thens: Sign of scope creep—split the story (reference skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md)
  • Vague Thens: "Then I see improved performance" (unmeasurable—make it specific)

Step 4: Add a Summary

Write a short, memorable summary that captures the story's value:

- **Summary:** [Brief, human-readable title]

Examples:

  • ✅ "Enable Google login for trial users to reduce signup friction"
  • ✅ "Bulk delete items to save time for power users"
  • ❌ "Add delete button" (feature-centric, not value-centric)

Step 5: Validate and Refine

  • Read aloud to the team: Does everyone understand who, what, why?
  • Test acceptance criteria: Can QA write test cases from this?
  • Check for splitting: If the story feels too big, use skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md
  • Ensure testability: Can you prove "Then" happened?

Examples

See examples/sample.md for full examples (good, bad, and split-needed stories).

Mini example excerpt:

### User Story 042:

- **Summary:** Enable Google login for trial users to reduce signup friction

#### Use Case:
- **As a** trial user visiting the app for the first time
- **I want to** log in using my Google account
- **so that** I can access the app without creating and remembering a new password

#### Acceptance Criteria:
- **Scenario:** First-time trial user logs in via Google OAuth
- **Given:** I am on the login page
- **and Given:** I have a login account
- **When:** I click the "Sign in with Google" button and authorize the app
- **Then:** I am logged into the app and redirected to the onboarding flow

Common Pitfalls

Pitfall 1: Technical Tasks Disguised as User Stories

Symptom: "As a developer, I want to refactor the API, so that the code is cleaner"

Consequence: This is an engineering task, not a user story. No user value is delivered.

Fix: If there's no user outcome, it's not a user story—use an engineering task or tech debt ticket instead.


Pitfall 2: "As a User" (Too Generic)

Symptom: Every story starts with "As a user"

Consequence: No persona clarity. Different users have different needs.

Fix: Use specific personas: "As a trial user," "As a paid subscriber," "As an admin," etc. (reference skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md)


Pitfall 3: "So That" Restates "I Want To"

Symptom: "I want to click the save button, so that I can save my work"

Consequence: No insight into why the user cares. Just restating the action.

Fix: Dig into the motivation: "so that I don't lose my progress if the page crashes" (real outcome).


Pitfall 4: Multiple When/Then Statements

Symptom: Acceptance criteria with 5 "When" statements and 5 "Then" statements

Consequence: Story is too big. Likely multiple features bundled together.

Fix: Split the story using skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md. Each When/Then pair should be its own story (or at least evaluated for splitting).


Pitfall 5: Untestable Acceptance Criteria

Symptom: "Then the user has a better experience" or "Then it's faster"

Consequence: QA can't verify success. Ambiguous definition of "done."

Fix: Make it measurable: "Then the page loads in under 2 seconds" or "Then the user sees a success confirmation message."


References

Related Skills

  • skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md — How to break large stories into smaller ones
  • skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md — Defines the "As a [persona]" section
  • skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md — Stories should address validated problems
  • skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md — Epics decompose into user stories

Optional Helpers

  • skills/user-story/scripts/user-story-template.py — Deterministic Markdown stub generator (no network access)

External Frameworks

  • Mike Cohn, User Stories Applied (2004) — Origin of the "As a / I want / so that" format
  • Gherkin (Cucumber) — "Given/When/Then" acceptance criteria format
  • INVEST criteria (Independent, Negotiable, Valuable, Estimable, Small, Testable)

Dean's Work

  • [Link to relevant Dean Peters' Substack articles if applicable]

Provenance

  • Adapted from prompts/user-story-prompt-template.md in the https://github.com/deanpeters/product-manager-prompts repo.

Skill type: Component Suggested filename: user-story.md Suggested placement: /skills/components/ Dependencies: References skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md, skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md Used by: skills/user-story-splitting/SKILL.md, skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md

GitHub 저장소

deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills
경로: skills/user-story
0
ai-agentsai-product-managementclaude-skillspm-frameworksproduct-management

연관 스킬

content-collections

메타

이 스킬은 콘텐츠 콜렉션(Content Collections)을 위한 프로덕션 검증된 설정을 제공합니다. 콘텐츠 콜렉션은 Markdown/MDX 파일을 Zod 검증이 포함된 타입 안전한 데이터 콜렉션으로 변환해주는 TypeScript 최우선 도구입니다. 블로그, 문서 사이트 또는 콘텐츠 중심의 Vite + React 애플리케이션을 구축할 때 타입 안전성과 자동 콘텐츠 검증을 보장하기 위해 사용하세요. Vite 플러그인 구성과 MDX 컴파일부터 배포 최적화 및 스키마 검증에 이르기까지 모든 것을 다룹니다.

스킬 보기

polymarket

메타

이 스킬은 개발자들이 Polymarket 예측 시장 플랫폼을 활용한 애플리케이션을 구축할 수 있도록 지원하며, 거래 및 시장 데이터를 위한 API 통합 기능을 포함합니다. 또한 WebSocket을 통한 실시간 데이터 스트리밍을 제공하여 실시간 거래와 시장 활동을 모니터링할 수 있습니다. 이를 통해 거래 전략을 구현하거나 실시간 시장 업데이트를 처리하는 도구를 생성하는 데 활용할 수 있습니다.

스킬 보기

creating-opencode-plugins

메타

이 스킬은 개발자들이 명령어, 파일, LSP 작업 등 25개 이상의 이벤트 유형에 연결되는 OpenCode 플러그인을 만들 수 있도록 돕습니다. JavaScript/TypeScript 모듈을 위한 플러그인 구조, 이벤트 API 명세, 구현 패턴을 제공합니다. OpenCode AI 어시스턴트의 라이프사이클을 사용자 정의 이벤트 기반 로직으로 가로채거나, 모니터링하거나, 확장해야 할 때 사용하세요.

스킬 보기

sglang

메타

SGLang은 RadixAttention 프리픽스 캐싱을 활용하여 JSON, 정규식, 에이전트 워크플로우를 위한 고속 구조화 생성에 특화된 고성능 LLM 서빙 프레임워크입니다. 특히 반복되는 프리픽스가 있는 작업에서 상당히 빠른 추론 속도를 제공하여 복잡한 구조화 출력 및 다중 턴 대화에 이상적입니다. 제약 디코딩이 필요하거나 광범위한 프리픽스 공유가 있는 애플리케이션을 구축할 때는 vLLM과 같은 대안보다 SGLang을 선택하십시오.

스킬 보기