bot-bottle/docs/prds

Product requirement docs

One PRD per feature: what to build, why, and how it's scoped. The PRD is the durable spec — it should stand on its own without a Gitea issue thread (see ../README.md for when a PRD is the right document vs. a research note or a decision record).

Naming and numbering

NNNN-kebab-title.md, zero-padded and sequential (0024-…, 0025-…). Numbers are never reused; gaps are fine (there is no 0005). The number is assigned at creation and stays fixed for the life of the doc.

Status

The Status: line near the top tracks the PRD's lifecycle:

• Draft — proposed, not yet shipped.
• Active — the design has shipped to main and is in effect.
• Superseded by PRD NNNN — replaced by a later PRD; kept for history.
• Retargeted by PRD NNNN — folded into a later PRD's scope.

Format

# PRD NNNN: <short title>

- **Status:** Draft
- **Author:** <who>
- **Created:** YYYY-MM-DD
- **Issue:** #<n>            # optional — convenience pointer only

## Summary
One paragraph: what this builds and the pain it solves.

## Problem
The current state and why it's inadequate.

## Goals / Success Criteria
Bullets a reviewer can check the finished work against.

## Non-goals
What this explicitly does not do — and won't, to head off scope creep.

## Scope
In scope / out of scope, when the boundary needs spelling out.

## Design
How it works: schema, data flow, diagrams, algorithms as needed.

## Implementation chunks
Ordered, mergeable steps (optional; for multi-PR features).

## Open questions
Unresolved decisions — resolve or fold into Design before shipping.

Sections are a guide, not a straitjacket: drop the ones a given PRD doesn't need (a small change rarely needs Scope or Implementation chunks) and add others where they help (e.g. Testing strategy, Alternatives considered, References). Keep the rationale self-contained — inline the reasoning rather than linking out to an issue thread, so the PRD survives a move off Gitea.