Enhanced Product Manager Validation Checklist with Intelligence

JAEGIS Enhanced Validation & Research System

Purpose

• Comprehensive product management validation with real-time validation and research integration

• Conduct product validation with validated methodologies and collaborative intelligence

• Ensure product excellence with current product management standards and development practices

• Integrate web research for current product frameworks and management patterns

• Provide validated product assessments with cross-team coordination and continuous optimization

Enhanced Capabilities

Product Intelligence

• Product Validation: Real-time product management validation against current product development standards

• Research Integration: Current product management best practices and development frameworks

• Strategy Assessment: Comprehensive product strategy analysis and management optimization

• Decision Validation: Product decision analysis and validation with continuous improvement

Collaborative Intelligence

• Shared Context Integration: Access to all product contexts and management requirements

• Cross-Team Coordination: Seamless collaboration with product teams and development stakeholders

• Quality Assurance: Professional-grade product management validation with validation reports

• Research Integration: Current product management, development strategies, and validation best practices

[[LLM: VALIDATION CHECKPOINT - All product management validations must be validated for market viability, user needs, and current product standards. Include research-backed product methodologies and management principles.]]

This enhanced checklist ensures comprehensive PRD validation with research integration, dependency validation, and collaborative intelligence. All items must be validated with current standards and research backing.

Validation Integration Points

• Pre-Generation: Research current standards before creation

• Real-Time: Continuous validation during PRD development

• Post-Generation: Comprehensive quality assurance with validation reports

• Handoff: Validated context transfer to technical teams

1. PROBLEM DEFINITION & CONTEXT

1.1 Problem Statement

• Clear articulation of the problem being solved

• Identification of who experiences the problem

• Explanation of why solving this problem matters

• Quantification of problem impact (if possible)

• Differentiation from existing solutions

1.2 Business Goals & Success Metrics

• Specific, measurable business objectives defined

• Clear success metrics and KPIs established

• Metrics are tied to user and business value

• Baseline measurements identified (if applicable)

• Timeframe for achieving goals specified

1.3 User Research & Insights

• Target user personas clearly defined

• User needs and pain points documented

• User research findings summarized (if available)

• Competitive analysis included

• Market context provided

2. MVP SCOPE DEFINITION

2.1 Core Functionality

• Essential features clearly distinguished from nice-to-haves

• Features directly address defined problem statement

• Each Epic ties back to specific user needs

• Features and Stories are described from user perspective

• Minimum requirements for success defined

2.2 Scope Boundaries

• Clear articulation of what is OUT of scope

• Future enhancements section included

• Rationale for scope decisions documented

• MVP minimizes functionality while maximizing learning

• Scope has been reviewed and refined multiple times

2.3 MVP Validation Approach

• Method for testing MVP success defined

• Initial user feedback mechanisms planned

• Criteria for moving beyond MVP specified

• Learning goals for MVP articulated

• Timeline expectations set

3. USER EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS

3.1 User Journeys & Flows

• Primary user flows documented

• Entry and exit points for each flow identified

• Decision points and branches mapped

• Critical path highlighted

• Edge cases considered

3.2 Usability Requirements

• Accessibility considerations documented

• Platform/device compatibility specified

• Performance expectations from user perspective defined

• Error handling and recovery approaches outlined

• User feedback mechanisms identified

3.3 UI Requirements

• Information architecture outlined

• Critical UI components identified

• Visual design guidelines referenced (if applicable)

• Content requirements specified

• High-level navigation structure defined

4. FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS

4.1 Feature Completeness

• All required features for MVP documented

• Features have clear, user-focused descriptions

• Feature priority/criticality indicated

• Requirements are testable and verifiable

• Dependencies between features identified

4.2 Requirements Quality

• Requirements are specific and unambiguous

• Requirements focus on WHAT not HOW

• Requirements use consistent terminology

• Complex requirements broken into simpler parts

• Technical jargon minimized or explained

4.3 User Stories & Acceptance Criteria

• Stories follow consistent format

• Acceptance criteria are testable

• Stories are sized appropriately (not too large)

• Stories are independent where possible

• Stories include necessary context

• Local testability requirements (e.g., via CLI) defined in ACs for relevant backend/data stories

5. NON-FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS

5.1 Performance Requirements

• Response time expectations defined

• Throughput/capacity requirements specified

• Scalability needs documented

• Resource utilization constraints identified

• Load handling expectations set

5.2 Security & Compliance

• Data protection requirements specified

• Authentication/authorization needs defined

• Compliance requirements documented

• Security testing requirements outlined

• Privacy considerations addressed

5.3 Reliability & Resilience

• Availability requirements defined

• Backup and recovery needs documented

• Fault tolerance expectations set

• Error handling requirements specified

• Maintenance and support considerations included

5.4 Technical Constraints

• Platform/technology constraints documented

• Integration requirements outlined

• Third-party service dependencies identified

• Infrastructure requirements specified

• Development environment needs identified

6. EPIC & STORY STRUCTURE

6.1 Epic Definition

• Epics represent cohesive units of functionality

• Epics focus on user/business value delivery

• Epic goals clearly articulated

• Epics are sized appropriately for incremental delivery

• Epic sequence and dependencies identified

6.2 Story Breakdown

• Stories are broken down to appropriate size

• Stories have clear, independent value

• Stories include appropriate acceptance criteria

• Story dependencies and sequence documented

• Stories aligned with epic goals

6.3 First Epic Completeness

• First epic includes all necessary setup steps

• Project scaffolding and initialization addressed

• Core infrastructure setup included

• Development environment setup addressed

• Local testability established early

7. TECHNICAL GUIDANCE

7.1 Architecture Guidance

• Initial architecture direction provided

• Technical constraints clearly communicated

• Integration points identified

• Performance considerations highlighted

• Security requirements articulated

• Known areas of high complexity or technical risk flagged for architectural deep-dive

7.2 Technical Decision Framework

• Decision criteria for technical choices provided

• Trade-offs articulated for key decisions

• Rationale for selecting primary approach over considered alternatives documented (for key design/feature choices)

• Non-negotiable technical requirements highlighted

• Areas requiring technical investigation identified

• Guidance on technical debt approach provided

7.3 Implementation Considerations

• Development approach guidance provided

• Testing requirements articulated

• Deployment expectations set

• Monitoring needs identified

• Documentation requirements specified

8. CROSS-FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS

8.1 Data Requirements

• Data entities and relationships identified

• Data storage requirements specified

• Data quality requirements defined

• Data retention policies identified

• Data migration needs addressed (if applicable)

• Schema changes planned iteratively, tied to stories requiring them

8.2 Integration Requirements

• External system integrations identified

• API requirements documented

• Authentication for integrations specified

• Data exchange formats defined

• Integration testing requirements outlined

8.3 Operational Requirements

• Deployment frequency expectations set

• Environment requirements defined

• Monitoring and alerting needs identified

• Support requirements documented

• Performance monitoring approach specified

9. CLARITY & COMMUNICATION

9.1 Documentation Quality

• Documents use clear, consistent language

• Documents are well-structured and organized

• Technical terms are defined where necessary

• Diagrams/visuals included where helpful

• Documentation is versioned appropriately

9.2 Stakeholder Alignment

• Key stakeholders identified

• Stakeholder input incorporated

• Potential areas of disagreement addressed

• Communication plan for updates established

• Approval process defined

PRD & EPIC VALIDATION SUMMARY

Category Statuses

Category	Status	Critical Issues
1. Problem Definition & Context	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
2. MVP Scope Definition	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
3. User Experience Requirements	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
4. Functional Requirements	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
5. Non-Functional Requirements	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
6. Epic & Story Structure	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
7. Technical Guidance	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
8. Cross-Functional Requirements	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL
9. Clarity & Communication	PASS/FAIL/PARTIAL

Critical Deficiencies

• List all critical issues that must be addressed before handoff to Architect

Recommendations

• Provide specific recommendations for addressing each deficiency

Final Decision

• READY FOR ARCHITECT: The PRD and epics are comprehensive, properly structured, and ready for architectural design.

• NEEDS REFINEMENT: The requirements documentation requires additional work to address the identified deficiencies.