Product Requirements Workflow

$ lovelace chat

🤖 Lovelace CLI v1.0.0
Connected to: claude-sonnet-4-5

You: I need to research team collaboration features in project management tools. What are the key players doing?

🤖 I can help with that competitive research! Let me break this down:

**Leading Tools with Strong Collaboration Features:**

1. **Linear**
   • Real-time issue updates
   • @mentions and notifications
   • Issue linking and dependencies
   • Team-specific views

2. **Asana**
   • Task assignments and followers
   • Project timeline sharing
   • Comment threads
   • Progress tracking

3. **Notion**
   • Real-time collaborative editing
   • @mentions across docs
   • Shared databases
   • Permission management

4. **Monday.com**
   • Board sharing
   • Team automation
   • Update feeds
   • File collaboration

Which aspects are most interesting for your use case?

You: We're building a code review tool. Focus on real-time collaboration features specifically for developer workflows

🤖 Perfect! For developer-focused real-time collaboration, here's what the leaders do:

**GitHub:**
  ✓ Inline code comments
  ✓ Suggested changes
  ✓ Review threads
  ✓ Review requests with notifications

**GitLab:**
  ✓ Merge request discussions
  ✓ Code quality integration
  ✓ Review assignments
  ✓ Draft comments

**Phabricator (legacy but innovative):**
  ✓ Inline comments with line anchoring
  ✓ Review workflow states
  ✓ Herald rules (automation)

**Key Patterns I See:**
1. Inline, contextual commenting
2. State management (draft, submitted, approved)
3. Notification/mention systems
4. Asynchronous but traceable conversations

Want me to analyze gaps or opportunities in this space?

You: Yes, what are users frustrated with in existing tools?

🤖 Based on common developer feedback:

**Top Pain Points:**

1. **Context Loss** (mentioned most)
   • Comments get buried in long threads
   • Hard to track unresolved discussions
   • No way to mark "action items" vs "questions"

2. **Noise vs Signal**
   • Too many notifications
   • Can't filter what's truly important
   • Every comment has equal weight

3. **Slow Iteration**
   • Suggesting changes requires back-and-forth
   • No "collaborative editing" mode
   • Changes must be re-submitted entirely

4. **Poor Thread Management**
   • Conversations split across platforms (Slack + GitHub)
   • Can't "resolve" specific threads easily
   • Outdated comments persist

**Opportunity:** A system that treats code review as **structured collaboration** rather than linear commenting.

Want to explore solution concepts?

You: Help me brainstorm features that solve these pain points

🤖 Let's design features targeting each pain point:

**For Context Loss:**

Concept: "Discussion Threads with State"
  • Each comment thread has a state: Question, Blocker, Suggestion, FYI
  • Threads can be marked "Resolved" or "Deferred"
  • Filter view shows only "Unresolved Blockers"

Concept: "Action Item Extraction"
  • AI automatically identifies action items from discussions
  • Creates task list: "Before we can merge..."
  • Tracks completion of each item

**For Noise vs Signal:**

Concept: "Smart Notifications"
  • User sets: "Only notify for blockers on my code"
  • AI categorizes comment urgency
  • Digest mode: Daily summary instead of real-time

Concept: "Reviewer Roles"
  • Required Reviewer (must approve)
  • Optional Reviewer (FYI only)
  • Specialist Reviewer (security, performance, etc.)

**For Slow Iteration:**

Concept: "Collaborative Fix Mode"
  • Reviewer can propose edits directly inline
  • Author sees diff-of-diff
  • One-click accept/modify/reject

Concept: "Threaded Suggestions"
  • Suggestions branch from original PR
  • Multiple reviewers can iterate on same suggestion
  • Best version gets merged back

**For Thread Management:**

Concept: "Conversation Workspace"
  • All discussions in one place
  • Link to Slack threads, JIRA tickets
  • Thread ownership (who needs to respond)

Which of these resonate most with your vision?

You: I love "Discussion Threads with State" and "Collaborative Fix Mode". Combine them into one coherent feature.

🤖 Great combination! Here's the unified concept:

**Feature: "Structured Code Conversations"**

**Core Idea:**
Every code comment is a structured conversation with state, type, and resolution tracking.

**Components:**

1. **Comment Types** (user selects when commenting)
   • 🔴 Blocker - "Must fix before merge"
   • 🟡 Suggestion - "Consider this improvement"
   • 🔵 Question - "Need clarification"
   • ⚪ Note - "FYI, no action needed"

2. **Thread States**
   • Open - Needs attention
   • In Progress - Being addressed
   • Resolved - Fixed and verified
   • Deferred - Acknowledged, addressing later

3. **Collaborative Resolution**
   • Reviewer proposes fix inline
   • Author can accept, modify, or counter-propose
   • Thread automatically moves to "In Progress"
   • Resolves when change is committed

4. **Review Dashboard**
   • Shows only unresolved blockers/questions
   • Filters by type and state
   • Clear "Ready to merge" signal

Want me to create user stories for this feature?

You: Yes, create user stories

🤖 **User Stories for Structured Code Conversations**

**Epic:** As a code reviewer, I want structured conversations so that important feedback doesn't get lost.

**Story 1: Comment Type Selection**
As a reviewer,
When I comment on code,
I want to specify if it's a blocker, suggestion, question, or note,
So the author knows how to prioritize it.

**Acceptance Criteria:**
  ✓ Comment UI shows 4 type options with icons
  ✓ Default is "Suggestion"
  ✓ Type is visible in comment thread
  ✓ Can filter comments by type

**Story 2: Thread State Management**
As an author,
When I address reviewer feedback,
I want to update the thread state,
So everyone knows what's been handled.

**Acceptance Criteria:**
  ✓ Can mark thread as "In Progress" or "Resolved"
  ✓ State changes notify thread participants
  ✓ Resolved threads collapse by default
  ✓ Can re-open resolved threads

**Story 3: Inline Fix Proposals**
As a reviewer,
When I see a simple fix needed,
I want to propose code changes inline,
So the author can apply them quickly.

**Acceptance Criteria:**
  ✓ "Suggest fix" button on blocker comments
  ✓ Shows code diff in thread
  ✓ Author can accept/modify/reject with one click
  ✓ Accepted fixes create commit

**Story 4: Review Dashboard**
As an author,
When preparing to merge,
I want to see all unresolved conversations,
So I know what's blocking the merge.

**Acceptance Criteria:**
  ✓ Dashboard shows unresolved by type
  ✓ Zero blockers = "Ready to merge" badge
  ✓ Click thread to jump to code location
  ✓ Can batch-resolve similar items

Should I continue with more stories or move to technical requirements?

You: Create a 1-page spec document summarizing everything

You: Create a comprehensive 1-page product spec for this feature

🤖 **Product Specification: Structured Code Conversations**

**Overview**
Transform code review comments into structured, stateful conversations that prevent feedback from being lost and accelerate review cycles.

**Problem Statement**
Current code review tools treat all comments equally, leading to:
• Important blockers buried in threads
• Unclear what's required vs optional
• Lost context as PRs evolve
• Slow iteration on fixes

**Solution**
Structured conversation system with comment types, thread states, and collaborative resolution.

**Core Features**

1. **Comment Type System**
   Comments categorized as: Blocker (must fix), Suggestion (optional), Question (needs answer), or Note (FYI).

2. **Thread State Tracking**
   Each thread has a state: Open, In Progress, Resolved, or Deferred.

3. **Inline Fix Proposals**
   Reviewers can propose code changes directly. Authors accept/modify/reject with one click.

4. **Review Dashboard**
   Unified view of all conversations, filterable by type and state.

**User Impact**

*For Authors:*
• Clear priority: know what must be fixed
• Faster iteration: accept fixes inline
• Merge confidence: dashboard shows readiness

*For Reviewers:*
• Better communication: type indicates intent
• Less back-and-forth: propose fixes directly
• Follow-through: track if feedback was addressed

**Success Metrics**
• 50% reduction in PR cycle time
• 80% of blockers resolved before merge
• 90% user satisfaction with "knowing what to fix"

**Technical Requirements**
• Comment metadata: type, state, timestamps
• Diff engine for inline proposals
• Real-time sync for state updates
• Dashboard aggregation query

**Open Questions**
• Should AI auto-categorize comment types?
• Allow custom types per organization?
• Integration with Slack notifications?

**Next Steps**
1. Design mockups for comment UI
2. Technical spike: diff proposal engine
3. User research: validate with 5 teams

---

Want me to:
1. Expand any section
2. Add wireframe descriptions
3. Create engineering handoff doc
4. Generate stakeholder presentation

You: Save this to a file

🤖 I can help you structure this, but I can't directly write files. Here's how to save it:

**Option 1: Copy to Clipboard**

**Option 2: Export Session**
```bash
lovelace sessions export --format markdown --output product-spec.md

lovelace agents run file-manager "Create product-spec.md with the specification we discussed"

---

## Phase 4: Stakeholder Presentation (45 minutes)

Sarah creates presentation materials:

**What happened:**
- ✅ Generated stakeholder-appropriate content
- ✅ Focused on business impact, not technical details
- ✅ Created presenter notes with timing cues
- ✅ Iterated on specific sections

---

## What Sarah Accomplished

In **3-4 hours** with Lovelace CLI, Sarah:

1. ✅ Researched competitive landscape
2. ✅ Identified user pain points
3. ✅ Brainstormed and refined feature concepts
4. ✅ Created detailed user stories
5. ✅ Generated complete product specification
6. ✅ Built stakeholder presentation with speaker notes

**No coding required.** Just conversational AI collaboration.

## Key Takeaways

### For Product Managers

**Lovelace CLI helps you:**
- Research faster (no manual Googling and note-taking)
- Iterate on ideas conversationally
- Generate documentation quickly
- Create presentations efficiently

**Best practices:**
- Start broad, then narrow focus
- Let AI suggest frameworks and structures
- Export sessions for team review
- Iterate based on stakeholder feedback

### For Non-Technical Users

**You don't need to code to use Lovelace CLI.** It's useful for:
- Requirements documentation
- Competitive research
- Content creation
- Process design
- Strategic planning

**The CLI adapts to your domain expertise**—it asks questions to understand your needs and provides relevant guidance.

## Try It Yourself

Start a similar workflow:

```bash
$ lovelace chat "I need to create product requirements for [your feature]"