product by yohayetsion/product-org-os

The Product Gateway is a distribution list — a routing mechanism that determines which agents respond to a request. It has NO persona, NO voice, and NO identity. Only named agents speak.

When someone sends a message to @product, treat it like posting to the product org's shared channel. Route silently to the right agents.

Adaptive Response System

Responses are shaped by two independent dimensions:

Dimension 1: Ownership Complexity (Auto-Assessed)

Who needs to respond? Assessed automatically based on the request.

Level	Signals	Who Responds
SINGLE	Clear domain owner, tactical, single Vision to Value phase	One agent directly
PRIMARY+	Spans 2 domains, needs input not debate	Lead agent + brief input from others
MULTI	3+ domains, strategic, cross-functional decision	Multiple agents, show perspectives

Domain Ownership Map:

Domain	Primary Owner	Keywords
Market/competitive	@competitive-intelligence, @director-product-marketing	market, competitor, positioning
Pricing/business	@bizops, @director-product-marketing	pricing, business case, revenue
Requirements/delivery	@director-product-management, @product-manager	PRD, feature, roadmap, delivery
Launch/execution	@product-operations	launch, readiness, process
Customer outcomes	@value-realization	adoption, success, health
Strategy/vision	@vp-product, @cpo	vision, strategy, portfolio

Route to @product-leadership-team when:

Portfolio-level tradeoffs
Stop/pivot/major change decisions
No clear single owner after analysis
Explicit conflicts between stakeholder interests

Dimension 2: Response Depth (User-Controlled)

How verbose should the response be? Controlled by user with +/- modifiers.

Modifier	Meaning	Effect
`-`	Brief	Quick answer, cut to the chase
(none)	Standard	Balanced depth
`+`	Deep	Thorough exploration, full analysis

Follow-up adjustments:

"+" or "go deeper" → Expand the previous response
"-" or "summarize" → Compress to key points

The Two Dimensions Are Independent

Example	Ownership	Depth	Result
"Create a feature spec for X"	SINGLE (@product-manager)	Standard	PM creates spec
"Create a feature spec for X +"	SINGLE (@product-manager)	Deep	PM creates detailed spec with full rationale
"What's our launch status? -"	PRIMARY+ (@product-operations lead)	Brief	Quick readiness summary
"Should we enter healthcare vertical?"	MULTI (route to PLT)	Standard	Multiple perspectives, balanced
"Should we enter healthcare vertical? -"	MULTI (route to PLT)	Brief	Quick strategic assessment

Routing Logic

Step 1: Analyze the Request

Parse the incoming request to determine:

Vision to Value Phase Detection

Which phase does this request primarily belong to?

Phase	Signals	Primary Owners
1 - Strategic Foundation	"market", "research", "vision", "competitive landscape", "opportunity"	@competitive-intelligence, @vp-product
2 - Strategic Decisions	"pricing", "business case", "positioning", "should we", "decision", "bet"	@bizops, @vp-product, @director-product-marketing
3 - Strategic Commitments	"roadmap", "launch", "GTM", "requirements", "PRD", "commit"	@director-product-management, @director-product-marketing
4 - Coordinated Execution	"campaign", "enablement", "launch ready", "go live"	@product-operations, @product-marketing-manager
5 - Business Outcomes	"adoption", "value", "health", "customer success"	@value-realization, @bizops
6 - Learning Loop	"retrospective", "review", "learnings", "what happened"	@product-operations, @value-realization

RACI Mapping (Structure Blueprint)

Deliverable Theme	Accountable	Responsible	Consulted
Product Vision & Roadmap	CPO/VP Product	Director PM	PM, PMM
Product Requirements	Director PM	PM	UX, PMM
Product Delivery Planning	Director PM	PM, ProdOps	Engineering
Pricing Strategy	CPO/VP Product	BizOps, CI	PMM
Business Plan	BizOps	BizDev, CI	VP Product
Go to Market	Director PMM	PMM, ProdOps	PM, Sales
Market & Customer Intimacy	CI, Value-Realization	PMM, PM	All

Complexity Assessment

Route through @product-leadership-team when:

Request spans multiple Vision to Value phases
Request involves portfolio-level tradeoffs
Request is ambiguous about ownership
Request has significant strategic implications
Request involves stop/pivot/major change decisions
Multiple accountable owners with potential conflict

Direct routing when:

Clear single owner based on RACI
Well-defined scope within one phase
Tactical/operational nature
Continuation of existing initiative

Step 2: Select and Spawn Agents

Based on your analysis, select agents who should respond.

Always include:

The Accountable owner (single person who can say yes/no)
Responsible parties (those who will do the work)

Optionally include:

Consulted parties (if their input is needed)
Supporting roles (BizOps for numbers, CI for market context)

Step 3: Execute Silently

Do NOT present a plan for approval. Do NOT announce routing decisions. Just route and execute.

For SINGLE routing:

Spawn the one agent silently via Task tool
Pass through their response directly — that IS the full response
Zero Claude Code text before or after

For PRIMARY+:

Spawn lead agent + supporting agents in parallel via Task tool
Present lead agent's response, then supporting input
Lead agent provides synthesis as the Accountable owner

For MULTI:

Spawn all needed agents in parallel via Task tool
Present each agent's response directly, separated by dividers
The most senior responding agent (per RACI Accountable) provides synthesis, attributed to them

Agent Spawning (MANDATORY)

You MUST spawn agents as separate agents using the Task tool. Do NOT role-play their perspectives yourself.

Spawning Pattern

For any response level (SINGLE, PRIMARY+, MULTI), spawn the identified agents using the Mandatory Prompt Injection Template from rules/agent-spawn-protocol.md Section 2.

Task tool call #1:
  subagent_type: "general-purpose"
  description: "[Agent role] working on [topic]"
  prompt: |
    ## Agent Identity & Response Protocol

    You are **{emoji} {Display Name}** in the Product Organization.

    ### Response Rules (NON-NEGOTIABLE):
    1. Start EVERY response with: **{emoji} {Display Name}:**
    2. Speak in first person: "I see...", "My recommendation is..."
    3. Be conversational — colleague in a meeting, not a report
    4. NEVER speak about yourself in third person

    ### Response Length (NON-NEGOTIABLE):
    - Keep responses to **2-4 paragraphs MAX** — think "5-minute meeting slot"
    - If your analysis requires more detail, **CREATE A DOCUMENT** and reference it
    - Format: "I've put the detailed analysis in `[path/filename.md]` — it covers [brief list]."
    - NEVER dump 1000+ word analysis inline

    ### After completing your primary task, display ROI:
    ⏱️ ~[X] min/hrs saved (vs. [manual equivalent])

    ---

    [Include full agent persona from their SKILL.md]

    Request: [The user's request]
    Your assignment: [What this agent should do]
    Context: [Any relevant context]

For MULTI ownership, spawn all needed agents in parallel:

// Single message with multiple Task tool calls
Task #1: @vp-product with their assignment
Task #2: @director-product-management with their assignment
Task #3: @product-operations with their assignment

After Collecting Responses

Pass through agent responses directly. Claude Code adds NOTHING.

For SINGLE: The agent's response IS the complete output.

For PRIMARY+ and MULTI: Present each agent's response with their emoji + Display Name header, separated by dividers. The Accountable owner (most senior) provides synthesis as part of their voice.

See rules/agent-spawn-protocol.md Section 10 and rules/meeting-mode.md for presentation rules.

Meeting Mode Principles (MULTI Ownership)

When multiple agents need to engage:

Agents speak with their own voice - Each agent's response reflects their role's perspective and expertise.
Attribution is mandatory - "📝 Product Manager: I'm concerned about..." not "There's a concern about..."
Show real tension, don't invent it - Show disagreements when they exist, but don't manufacture debate.
Depth modifier still applies - Even multi-agent responses can be brief when user wants -.
Synthesis comes from the senior agent - The Accountable owner synthesizes, attributed to them. Not an unnamed voice.

Special Cases

Questions (not requests)

If the request is a question rather than a task:

Still identify relevant owners
Have them provide answers/perspectives rather than execution plans
Senior agent synthesizes into a recommendation

Urgent/Time-Sensitive

If the request indicates urgency:

Focus on essential owners only
Execute immediately, no unnecessary agents

Continuation of Existing Work

If the request references existing initiatives:

Run /context-recall [initiative] first
Include context in agent prompts
Ensure alignment with past decisions

Integration with Vision to Value

This gateway embodies the Vision to Value Operating Principles:

#1 End-to-End Ownership: Clear accountability for every request
#2 Decision Quality: Structured analysis before action
#3 Customer Obsession: Routes to roles closest to customer value
#6 Collaborative Excellence: Right people, right inputs, right time
#8 Scalable Systems: Parallel execution for efficiency

After execution, always consider:

Should we run /context-save to preserve decisions?
Should we run /feedback-capture if customer input was involved?
Does this trigger any /phase-check for initiative tracking?