Foundation Persona

What the source does

• FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
• NetworkNone observedNo outbound calls in the source
• ShellNone observedNo commands run in the source
• DependenciesPinnedNothing floats
• SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha 2abfbb961d31 · 19 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

• Publisherproduct-on-purpose GitHub organizationOwner of the repository this skill is read from
• Source folderproduct-on-purpose/pm-skills/skills/foundation-personaThe exact folder we audited
• LicenceApache-2.0As the repository states it
• Commit pinned for this verdict2abfbb961d31A new audit runs when the source changes
• Repository statusNot archivedLast push 1 day ago
• Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

Its description: Generates an evidence-calibrated product or marketing persona using the canonical v2.5 output contract. Use when shaping artifact perspective, stress-testing decisions, or framing product and GTM strategy.

---
name: foundation-persona
description: Generates an evidence-calibrated product or marketing persona using the canonical v2.5 output contract. Use when shaping artifact perspective, stress-testing decisions, or framing product and GTM strategy.
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
  classification: foundation
  version: "2.6.1"
  updated: 2026-08-16
  category: research
  frameworks: [triple-diamond, lean-startup, design-thinking]
  author: product-on-purpose
---
<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->
# Persona Builder

This skill produces decision-usable personas from one canonical template pack.

## Supported Modes

- `product`
- `marketing`
- `buyer` as input alias for `marketing` (output remains labeled `Marketing`)

Generated `agent` mode is out of scope for `v2.5.0`.
If the user asks for `agent`, ask them to choose `product` or `marketing`.

## When to Use

- Before drafting PM or GTM artifacts that need a clear persona viewpoint
- When teams disagree on priorities and need behavior-grounded tradeoff framing
- When assumptions and confidence levels must be explicit for decision review
- When tailoring downstream work (PRD, stories, launch, messaging, enablement) to a specific user or buyer profile

## When NOT to Use

- You need the job context rather than the person -> use `define-jtbd-canvas`; the canvas captures what customers hire products to do, the persona captures who they are
- You are mapping internal stakeholders, not customers -> use `discover-stakeholder-summary`
- You have raw interviews to synthesize first -> use `discover-interview-synthesis`; a persona built on unsynthesized notes inherits their noise
- No evidence exists at all and a real decision rides on the persona: gather research first; the skill labels assumptions honestly but cannot substitute for evidence

## Instructions

When asked to generate a persona, follow these steps:

1. **Resolve mode and intent**
   Determine whether the request is `product` or `marketing` (`buyer` alias allowed).
   If mode is omitted, ask for mode selection.
   If execution must continue without reply, default to `product` and state that fallback explicitly.

2. **Collect context and evidence**
   Use user-provided context first (goals, audience, domain, constraints, sources).
   If evidence is thin, continue generation but mark gaps and calibrate confidence.

3. **Select exactly one template**
   Use `references/TEMPLATE.md` and choose exactly one of:
   - `Product Persona Template`
   - `Marketing Persona Template`

4. **Generate a complete artifact**
   Fill the selected template end-to-end:
   - header + one-sentence core-reality statement
   - metadata table
   - `Persona Card`
   - sections `1` through `11`
   - `Evidence & Confidence`

5. **Enforce mode boundaries**
   - Product mode: focus on workflow behavior, decision patterns, friction, quality bar, and product tradeoffs.
   - Marketing mode: focus on buying triggers, evaluation criteria, committee dynamics, objections, messaging, and GTM implications.

6. **Apply evidence and confidence policy**
   - Use `High|Medium|Low` confidence with rationale.
   - Distinguish validated evidence from assumptions.
   - State open questions and governance follow-up.

7. **Finalize for direct use**
   Remove template guidance blockquotes (`>` notes) from the final output.
   Ensure narrative entries are concrete and decision-changing, not placeholder bullets.

## Output Contract (v2.5.0)

- Use one mode only (`Product` or `Marketing`) per output.
- Keep section numbering and headings from the selected template.
- Preserve the evidence table plus validated/assumed/open-questions/governance blocks.

## Quality Checklist

Before finalizing, verify:

- [ ] Exactly one mode is used and clearly labeled
- [ ] `buyer` inputs are normalized to `Marketing`
- [ ] Header, core-reality statement, metadata table, and `Persona Card` are present
- [ ] All `1` through `11` sections from the selected template are present and complete
- [ ] Includes/not-valid boundaries are explicit in the metadata and narrative
- [ ] Evidence table is populated with concrete sources
- [ ] Confidence is `High`, `Medium`, or `Low` with rationale
- [ ] `Validated`, `Assumed`, `Open questions`, and `Governance` blocks are present
- [ ] Template authoring notes (`>` guidance lines) are removed from the completed output

## Examples

See `references/EXAMPLE.md` for a completed sample output.

Excerpt, first 4,479 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

git clone https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills
git -C pm-skills checkout 2abfbb961d31

Works in

1. 2026-10-19
   ✓SAFE B 89 / 100

   first audit · source 2abfbb961d31

Questions about Foundation Persona

• github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills/tree/main/skills/foundat — the audited source at commit 2abfbb961d31 and every finding aboveObserved · 19 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology