PRD-to-spec workflows are valuable when they preserve handoff boundaries
The useful part of mattpocock/skills is the handoff discipline: synthesize context into a spec, define testing seams, then slice implementation into blocked vertical tickets.
The linked to-prd path is not present in the current mattpocock/skills repository. The adjacent skills that are present, especially to-spec and to-tickets, are still useful because they show the real pattern: a PRD-like artifact should not be a polished essay. It should be an execution bridge.
to-spec turns the current conversation and codebase understanding into a spec without re-interviewing the user. It asks for the problem, solution, user stories, implementation decisions, testing decisions, and out-of-scope boundaries. That structure matters because agents need stable decisions more than prose.
Specs need test seams
The most important instruction is to identify testing seams before publishing the spec. Existing seams are preferred; new seams should be as high-level and few as possible. This keeps the implementation verifiable and prevents the next agent from spreading tests across arbitrary internals.
Tickets need vertical slices
to-tickets breaks the approved plan into tracer-bullet tickets. Each ticket should deliver a complete, narrow, demoable behavior across the necessary layers. Blocking edges are explicit, so agents can work the frontier without guessing sequencing.
Handoff boundaries are the product
Agent workflows fail when context handoff is informal. A spec records decisions. Tickets record dependency edges. Together they turn product intent into work units that a fresh context window can execute. That is the practical value behind PRD-to-spec skills.