PM Workflow Builder

This skill creates new multi-skill workflows for the pm-skills library. It produces a Workflow Implementation Packet - a draft

_workflows/<name>.md

file, a draft

commands/workflow-<name>.md

command, and the cross-cutting update checklist - in a staging area for review before promotion to canonical locations. The builder authors; it never executes a chain and it never promotes its own output.

When to Use

You have an idea for a new multi-skill workflow ("I need a workflow for quarterly business reviews")
You know the skills you want to chain and want them captured durably ("chain competitive-analysis, experiment-results, pivot-decision")
A
```
/chain
```
run (orchestrator Mode B) proved reusable and its completion output suggested promoting the chain to a durable workflow; hand this skill the exact chain expression from that suggestion

When NOT to Use

To run a sequence once without authoring anything -> use the
```
/chain
```
command or
```
utility-pm-workflow-orchestrator
```
directly

To build or modify a single skill -> use

utility-pm-skill-builder

utility-pm-skill-validate

, or

utility-pm-skill-iterate

To customize an existing workflow -> edit its
```
_workflows/<name>.md
```
directly; the overlap analysis below will point you there when coverage is high

Instructions

Step 1: Understand the Idea

Accept the idea in any of three entry forms, all converging on the same downstream flow:

Problem-first: "I need a workflow for X." Identify the recurring PM process, who runs it, and the artifact trail it should leave.
Skills-first: a list of skills the user already wants to chain.
Chain-promotion: a literal chain expression (for example
```
measure-experiment-results -> discover-stakeholder-summary
```
), usually pasted from the orchestrator's completion suggestion, plus the context the run used.

If the idea is vague, ask ONE clarifying question (the recurring trigger and the final artifact), then proceed. Do not interrogate.

Step 2: Overlap Analysis + Why Gate

Scan the

_workflows/

directory at run time for the current inventory (list every

*.md

except

README.md

). Never rely on a remembered count or a hardcoded list. Compare the idea against ALL existing workflows:

Name each overlapping workflow and what it covers.
Estimate coverage overlap honestly.

Kill gate (>70% coverage overlap): recommend, in order, (a) customizing the existing workflow, (b) adding a step to it, or (c) just using

/chain

for the occasional run. Do not proceed.

Why Gate (any meaningful overlap): ask for 2-3 specific scenarios where the existing workflows fail to produce what is needed. Do not pass the gate without that evidence or an explicit user override (record the override in the packet's Decision section).

Step 3: Sequence Design

Select and order the steps with the user. Apply the chain-expression contract's validation rules at authoring time (

skills/utility-pm-workflow-orchestrator/references/PARSE-CONTRACT.md

, Mode B Chain Expression Contract):

Every step must resolve to an installed skill at
```
skills/<name>/SKILL.md
```
by EXACT name. Never approximate or auto-correct; on a miss, refuse the step and OFFER the closest real names (an offer, never a substitution).
Category 1 content skills only. Refuse as steps, each with a one-line explanation: Tier-3 maintenance skills (
```
utility-pm-skill-*
```
,
```
utility-pm-release-conductor
```
,
```
utility-pm-changelog-curator
```
,
```
utility-update-pm-skills
```
,
```
foundation-prioritized-action-plan
```
), dispatch skills that fan out to sub-agents (
```
utility-pm-critic
```
,
```
utility-pm-workflow-orchestrator
```
, and peers), and existing workflows (a workflow never nests a workflow). Self-reference is impossible by construction: this builder is itself Tier-3.
For EACH step, author the handoff: what the step consumes from the prior step's output, and what it must produce for the next. This authored handoff guidance is exactly what distinguishes a durable workflow from an ad-hoc chain; a packet without real handoffs is not ready.

Step 4: Generate the Packet

Write the complete Workflow Implementation Packet to

_staging/workflows/<name>/

(gitignored; the same review model as the skill builder). Never write to canonical locations.

_staging/workflows/<name>/
├── workflow.md      <- draft _workflows/<name>.md
├── command.md       <- draft commands/workflow-<name>.md
└── PACKET.md        <- decision, overlap analysis, checklist, promotion steps

Use

references/TEMPLATE.md

as the packet format. The workflow draft must carry the full section inventory the current

_workflows/*.md

files share (see the TEMPLATE's embedded skeleton); the command draft mirrors the existing

commands/workflow-*.md

shape, including one literal

skills/<name>/SKILL.md

path per step and the

$ARGUMENTS

footer. Derive a linear mermaid context-flow diagram from the final sequence (step names as nodes, execution order as edges).

Step 5: Review + Promotion Guidance

Present the packet and stop. The builder itself never promotes. On approval, the user (or a follow-up session) moves the drafts to their canonical paths and works the packet's Cross-Cutting Checklist, which names every count and documentation surface that adding a workflow trips, including the validator-blind

.github/workflows/release.yml

release-note template. The builder never edits those cross-cutting files itself.

Output Format

The packet follows

references/TEMPLATE.md

Decision - recommendation plus Why Gate evidence (or the recorded override)
Overlap Analysis - every overlapping workflow, what it covers, the gap
Workflow Draft - complete
```
_workflows/<name>.md
```
content
Command Draft - complete
```
commands/workflow-<name>.md
```
content
Cross-Cutting Checklist - every surface to update at promotion, with its enforcing validator (or "validator-blind" where none exists)
Promotion Steps - the move-verify-validate sequence

See

references/EXAMPLE.md

for one complete worked packet.

Quality Checklist

Before presenting the packet, verify:

Overlap analysis scanned the live
```
_workflows/
```
directory (no remembered list, no hardcoded count)
Why Gate evidence is specific (named scenarios) or an explicit override is recorded
Every step resolves to an installed skill by exact name
No Tier-3 maintenance skill, dispatch skill, or workflow appears as a step
Every step has an authored handoff (consumes / produces), not just a skill name
The workflow draft carries every section in the TEMPLATE's skeleton (metadata table, When to Use with Do NOT use, per-step blocks, context-flow diagram, tips, quality checklist, see also)
The command draft names each step's
```
skills/<name>/SKILL.md
```
path and ends with the
```
$ARGUMENTS
```
footer
The mermaid diagram matches the final sequence exactly
Everything written under
```
_staging/workflows/<name>/
```
; no canonical path touched
The Cross-Cutting Checklist is reproduced in full, including the
```
.github/workflows/release.yml
```
release-note row

Reference Files

Packet template:
```
references/TEMPLATE.md
```
Worked example (quarterly business review):
```
references/EXAMPLE.md
```

Chain-expression contract applied at authoring time:

skills/utility-pm-workflow-orchestrator/references/PARSE-CONTRACT.md

Workflow exemplars:

_workflows/sprint-planning.md

_workflows/customer-discovery.md

Command exemplar:
```
commands/workflow-sprint-planning.md
```

Sibling builder for single skills:

skills/utility-pm-skill-builder/SKILL.md

utility-pm-workflow-builder

NPX Install

Tags

SKILL.md Content