Install
$ agentstack add skill-mshadmanrahman-pm-pilot-synthesize-interviews ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Synthesize Interviews: User Research Synthesis
Turn raw interview transcripts, notes, or feedback dumps into structured insights. Produces two outputs: a synthesis report (themes + recommendations) and a standalone pain points document (problems only, no solutions).
When to Activate
- User says "synthesize interviews", "what did users say about X"
- User provides interview transcripts or notes to analyze
- User says "analyze this feedback", "research findings"
- After 3+ customer conversations (suggest proactively)
Input Modes
Accept input three ways:
- Pasted content: Raw transcript or notes directly in conversation
- File path: Point to a file or directory of transcripts
- Workspace reference: "Look at the interview notes in /research"
If input is a single interview, produce per-interview notes. If 3+ interviews, produce a cross-interview synthesis.
Process
Step 1: Extract Raw Observations
For each interview/feedback source:
- Identify the participant (role, context, seniority if available)
- Extract direct quotes that reveal pain, motivation, or behavior
- Note behaviors (what they actually do, not what they say they do)
- Flag surprises (anything that contradicts assumptions)
- Tag source:
[Interview: {participant}, {date}]
Step 2: Identify Themes
Group observations across interviews:
- Cluster related observations into themes (3-7 themes typical)
- For each theme, count how many participants mentioned it
- Rank themes by: frequency (how many said it) x intensity (how strongly they felt it)
- Distinguish between stated needs (what they say) and observed needs (what they do)
Step 3: Generate Pain Points Document
Produce a standalone document of problems only. No solutions. This prevents premature solutioning.
# Pain Points: {Research Topic}
**Status:** Draft
**Interviews:** {count}
**Date:** {date}
## Critical Pain Points (mentioned by 60%+ participants)
### 1. {Pain point title}
- **Frequency:** {n}/{total} participants
- **Intensity:** High/Medium/Low
- **Evidence:**
- "{Direct quote}" - {participant} [Interview: {name}, {date}]
- "{Direct quote}" - {participant}
- **Current workaround:** {how they cope today}
## Significant Pain Points (mentioned by 30-60%)
### 2. {Pain point title}
...
## Emerging Signals (mentioned by <30% but high intensity)
### 3. {Pain point title}
...
Step 4: Generate Synthesis Report
# Research Synthesis: {Topic}
**Status:** Draft
**Interviews:** {count}
**Date:** {date}
**Researcher:** {name}
## Executive Summary
{2-3 sentence summary of the most important finding}
## Methodology
- {count} interviews with {participant profile}
- Conducted {date range}
- Method: {structured/semi-structured/contextual inquiry}
## Key Themes
### Theme 1: {Title} ({n}/{total} participants)
**Summary:** {1-2 sentences}
**Evidence:**
- "{Quote}" - {participant} [Interview: {name}, {date}]
- "{Quote}" - {participant}
**Implication:** {What this means for the product}
### Theme 2: {Title}
...
## Contradictions and Tensions
- {Where participants disagreed and why it matters}
## Surprises
- {Things that challenged our assumptions} [Assumption invalidated]
## Recommendations
1. **{Action}**: {Why, based on which themes}
2. **{Action}**: {Why}
3. **{Action}**: {Why}
## Open Questions
- {What we still don't know after this research}
## Appendix: Participant Summary
| # | Role | Context | Key Quote |
|---|------|---------|-----------|
| P1 | {role} | {context} | "{quote}" |
Step 5: Cross-Reference
After synthesis:
- "Use
prdto spec solutions for the top pain points" - "Use
prioritizeto rank which pain points to solve first" - "Use
lenny-podcastfor Teresa Torres' Opportunity Solution Tree approach" - Offer to update
context/personas.mdwith new insights
Rules
- Never fabricate quotes. Every quote must come from the provided input.
- Separate observation from interpretation. Label which is which.
- Pain points doc has NO solutions. This is deliberate. Solutions come later.
- Tag evidence provenance. Every claim links to a specific participant and source.
- Preserve contradictions. If participants disagree, that's data, not noise.
- Count frequency honestly. "1 out of 3 mentioned it" is not a pattern. Say so.
- Flag small sample sizes. If fewer than 5 interviews, add
[Small sample: {n} interviews. Treat as directional, not conclusive.]
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: mshadmanrahman
- Source: mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://github.com/mshadmanrahman/pm-pilot#readme
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.