ChatGPT Prompts for Product Designers

<context> I am a product designer working on [PRODUCT]. I need to explore a new [FEATURE] for [USER]. We are in early divergent ideation and want breadth before we converge. </context> <task> 1. Generate 8 distinct concept directions for [FEATURE], each solving the core job differently (do not just reskin one idea). 2. For each concept give: a one-line name, the core mechanic, the primary user benefit, and the riskiest assumption. 3. Rank the 8 by a 1-5 desirability score and a 1-5 feasibility score. 4. Flag the 2 concepts that are most non-obvious but still viable, and explain why they are worth a sketch. </task>

<context> I am designing [FEATURE] for [PRODUCT], used by [USER]. I want to break out of category clichés by borrowing patterns from unrelated industries. </context> <task> 1. Identify 6 products or experiences from OUTSIDE my industry that solve a structurally similar problem to [FEATURE]. 2. For each, describe the specific interaction pattern or mental model that works. 3. Translate each pattern into a concrete design idea for [PRODUCT]. 4. Note one pitfall to avoid when adapting that pattern to my context. </task>

<context> My team frames the problem as: '[USER] struggles to do X with [PRODUCT].' I suspect we are solving the wrong problem and want to challenge the framing before designing. </context> <task> 1. Restate my problem in 5 alternative framings, each shifting the assumed cause or the desired outcome. 2. For each reframe, state what new solution space it opens. 3. Identify which framing is most likely to be the real root problem and why. 4. Suggest 2 quick research questions to validate the strongest reframe before we commit. </task>

<context> I am designing [FEATURE] for [PRODUCT] under tight constraints: it must work offline, ship in one sprint, and add zero new screens. [USER] is non-technical. </context> <task> 1. Generate 6 ideas that respect ALL three constraints simultaneously. 2. For each, explain how it honors the offline, one-sprint, and no-new-screen limits. 3. Highlight any idea that turns a constraint into an advantage. 4. Call out the single idea with the best effort-to-impact ratio and justify it. </task>

<context> I have a backlog of feature ideas for [PRODUCT]. I need to prioritize which to design first for [USER]. The ideas are: [LIST IDEAS]. </context> <task> 1. Score each idea on reach, impact, confidence, and effort (RICE), using reasonable assumptions you state explicitly. 2. Produce a ranked RICE table. 3. Recommend the top 3 to design next and explain the trade-offs. 4. Flag any idea that looks high-value but is too uncertain to start without research. </task>

<context> I am kicking off design for [FEATURE] on [PRODUCT], serving [USER]. Stakeholders are PM, eng lead, and marketing. I need a crisp brief to align everyone. </context> <task> 1. Draft a one-page design brief with these sections: Problem, Target user, Success metrics, Scope, Out of scope, Constraints, Open questions. 2. Keep each section to 2-4 bullet points, written for a mixed audience. 3. Phrase success metrics as measurable outcomes, not features. 4. End with a single sentence stating the design hypothesis we are testing. </task>

<context> We are designing [FEATURE] for [PRODUCT]. Leadership wants to know how we will measure success for [USER], but we only have a vague goal: 'improve engagement.' </context> <task> 1. Translate 'improve engagement' into 4-6 specific, measurable metrics tied to [FEATURE]. 2. For each metric, give a definition, a data source, and a sensible target direction. 3. Separate leading indicators from lagging indicators. 4. Recommend the single North Star metric and one guardrail metric to prevent gaming it. </task>

<context> I am about to brief [FEATURE] for [PRODUCT]. The stakeholders are [LIST ROLES]. They have competing priorities and I want to anticipate friction. </context> <task> 1. For each stakeholder role, infer their likely top priority and their biggest concern about [FEATURE]. 2. Identify the 2 most likely points of conflict between stakeholders. 3. Suggest framing for the brief that pre-empts each conflict. 4. Draft one alignment question to ask each stakeholder before design starts. </task>

<context> The brief for [FEATURE] on [PRODUCT] has grown too big to ship this quarter. I need to cut scope without losing the core value for [USER]. </context> <task> 1. Separate the brief into must-have, should-have, and could-have using MoSCoW. 2. Define the smallest version that still delivers the core user value (the walking skeleton). 3. List what we defer and the explicit risk of deferring each item. 4. Propose a phased rollout: v1 now, v1.1 next, with the trigger for each phase. </task>

<context> Before designing [FEATURE] for [PRODUCT], I want to ground the brief in how competitors handle the same job for [USER]. Key competitors: [LIST COMPETITORS]. </context> <task> 1. For each competitor, summarize how they solve the job [FEATURE] addresses (use general knowledge, flag uncertainty). 2. Identify the table-stakes elements we must match. 3. Identify 2 gaps or weaknesses we could exploit as differentiation. 4. Recommend one positioning angle for the brief and the design decision it implies. </task>

<context> I am mapping the flow for [USER] completing the core task of [FEATURE] in [PRODUCT]. I want a complete happy-path flow before I touch Figma. </context> <task> 1. List every step from entry point to task completion as a numbered sequence. 2. For each step, note the user goal, the screen or surface, and the primary action. 3. Mark decision points where the flow branches. 4. Identify the single step most likely to cause drop-off and why. </task>

<context> I have designed the happy path for [FEATURE] in [PRODUCT] for [USER]. Before handoff I need to cover edge cases and error states. </context> <task> 1. Enumerate edge cases across these categories: empty states, error states, permission/auth, network failure, and extreme inputs. 2. For each edge case, describe the trigger and the ideal user-facing behavior. 3. Recommend the message or microcopy the user should see. 4. Prioritize which edge cases must be designed for v1 versus deferred. </task>

<context> I want a journey map for [USER] adopting [FEATURE] in [PRODUCT], spanning awareness to habitual use, not just a single session. </context> <task> 1. Break the journey into stages: Awareness, First use, Activation, Habit, Advocacy. 2. For each stage describe the user goal, emotional state, and key touchpoint. 3. Identify the biggest friction or doubt at each stage. 4. Suggest one design intervention per stage to move the user forward. </task>

<context> I am restructuring the navigation of [PRODUCT] to better support [FEATURE] for [USER]. Current sections are: [LIST SECTIONS]. </context> <task> 1. Propose a cleaner IA, grouping content by user mental model rather than internal team structure. 2. Show the proposed nav as a labeled hierarchy (max 3 levels deep). 3. Explain each major grouping decision in one sentence. 4. Flag any current label that is jargon and suggest a clearer user-facing term. </task>

<context> New [USER] sign up for [PRODUCT] but drop off before experiencing the value of [FEATURE]. I need an onboarding flow that gets them to first value fast. </context> <task> 1. Define the single 'aha moment' for [FEATURE] and the shortest path to it. 2. Design a step-by-step onboarding flow with the minimum steps needed to reach that moment. 3. For each step, specify the goal, what to show, and what to defer. 4. Recommend where to use progressive disclosure versus required input. </task>