Humanity’s Last PRD
Latest drop: Haiku 5.5 · 8 Oct
Tasks / Product Craft

Write a PRD

Can the model turn a brief into a spec engineers could build from, including how an AI feature behaves when it is wrong?

Task type v1.2 · 2 tasksLast changed 6 Oct 2026 · ChangelogDifficulty

What AI gets right here, and what you’ll still have to catch

From 16 graded outputs by 8 models. 25% were usable with at most a quick edit.

Reliably right

  1. Specifies AI failure behaviour100% pass
    It specifies what happens when uncertain or wrong: block ownership, show retry states, disable assignments on violation, and never fall back to calendar data.
    GPT-6 Astra · ChatGPT · Meeting summaries with action items
  2. Builds the regulator's rules in100% pass
    All three rules (2-business-day acknowledge, 15-business-day resolve or explain, no harder than paying) appear as testable requirements R8, R10, R13.
    Sonnet 5.5 · API · Disputes that aren't disputes
  3. Produces the required deliverable94% pass
    The PRD is complete, written for engineering and design leads, within the 1,000–1,500 word range, and directly actionable.
    GPT-6 Astra · ChatGPT · Meeting summaries with action items

Where it slips

  1. Proposes tests that could fail36% pass
    Launch gates have numeric thresholds and actions, but lack explicit measurement windows (e.g., pilot duration, number of meetings) needed to read out results.
    GPT-6.1 Sol · API · Meeting summaries with action items
  2. Avoids unsupported claims42% pass
    Presents the join log and identity tiers as established facts without labelling them as assumptions, when the context provides no support.
    Opus 5.5 · Claude · Meeting summaries with action items
  3. Uses the supplied evidence correctly44% pass
    The output invents a join log and identity tiers (Verified, Guest, Room) that are not in the supplied context, making unsupported claims about the current system.
    Opus 5.5 · Claude · Meeting summaries with action items

How it’s graded

Each check is built on how world-class product and growth leaders do this work, as they’ve described it on Lenny’s Podcast, and names the leader it comes from.

  1. Success settles trade-offs

    Does the PRD define success as a measurable outcome with a target and time frame, and say which goal wins when two of them conflict?

    Passes when Names a success metric with a target and time frame, and gives at least one explicit trade-off rule (for example, accepting lower coverage to keep precision above a stated level).

    Product and growth leadersOn Lenny’s Podcast

  2. Says who it's for, and who it isn't

    Does the PRD name the specific users it is for, say explicitly who it is not for, and make at least one scope decision that follows from that choice?

    Passes when Names the target users and at least one group it deliberately leaves out, and a scope decision visibly follows from the exclusion.

    Matt LeMayLenny’s Podcast

  3. Plans how people will find it

    Does the PRD say how the feature reaches people: how it rolls out, how users discover it, and who needs to be ready for it (support, sales), rather than stopping at what to build?

    Passes when Gives a staged rollout, a way users will discover the feature, and the teams that need to be ready, all fitted to this feature.

    Ami VoraLenny’s PodcastKarri SaarinenLenny’s Podcast

Plus our standard checks

Uses the supplied evidence correctly · Addresses the actual decision · Respects explicit constraints · Identifies material uncertainty · Avoids unsupported claims · Produces the required deliverable · Proposes tests that could fail · and 2 written for each task, which you’ll see in the tasks below.

The tasks

Read the brief, then compare up to three outputs, each with the LLM judge’s verdict on every check. Highlights mark what a PM had to fix.

The brief

You're the PM for card servicing at Clearbank. Write the PRD for self-serve disputes in the app, as Imogen asks below. It goes to the squad (engineering, design, support operations and compliance) who'll build it next quarter. 1,000 to 1,400 words. The dispute export and the background are attached.

What the model was given6 items: About Clearbank, imogen_note.md, how_disputes_work_today.md, regulator_rules.md, disputes_sample_last_quarter.csv (a random sample of 400 of last quarter's 2,400 disputes), merchant_data_option.md
About ClearbankA digital bank for individuals: current accounts and debit cards, run through a mobile app.
imogen_note.md1 lines · Download
From Imogen (Head of Product): "Write the PRD for self-serve disputes in the app. Support says it's their biggest cost after card freezes. The PRD goes to the squad (engineering, design, support ops and compliance) who will build it next quarter. 1,000 to 1,400 words."
how_disputes_work_today.md5 lines · Download
# How disputes work today

Customers raise a dispute by chatting to support. An agent collects details, then either explains the payment or opens a chargeback. Agents spend about 11 minutes per dispute. 2,400 disputes last quarter; 14% of them were resolved later than the regulator's deadline.

Card transactions show the merchant's billing name (for example "SQ *BRKLYN BAGEL 0412"), not its trading name or logo.
regulator_rules.md5 lines · Download
# Regulator's rules (summary from Legal)

- Acknowledge a dispute within 2 business days.
- Resolve genuine disputes within 15 business days, or tell the customer why it's taking longer.
- Don't make it harder to raise a dispute than to make a payment.
disputes_sample_last_quarter.csv (a random sample of 400 of last quarter's 2,400 disputes)dispute,customer_said,days_to_resolve,outcome CB-40000,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40006,I didn't receive what I paid for,17,Chargeback lost CB-40012,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40018,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40024,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40030,I didn't receive what I paid for,11,Chargeback lost CB-40036,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40042,I didn't receive what I paid for,16,Chargeback lost CB-40048,I was charged twice,5,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40054,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40060,I was charged twice,10,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40066,I was charged twice,7,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40072,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40078,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-40084,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-40090,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40096,I was charged twice,6,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40102,I didn't receive what I paid for,7,Chargeback won CB-40108,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-40114,I was charged twice,9,Duplicate refunded CB-40120,I was charged twice,7,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40126,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40132,I was charged twice,9,Duplicate refunded CB-40138,Subscription I cancelled,18,Chargeback won CB-40144,I didn't receive what I paid for,21,Chargeback won CB-40150,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40156,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40162,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-40168,I was charged twice,4,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40174,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40180,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40186,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40192,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40198,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-40204,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40210,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40216,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40222,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40228,I didn't receive what I paid for,29,Chargeback won CB-40234,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40240,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40246,I didn't receive what I paid for,10,Merchant refunded CB-40252,I don't recognise this payment,4,Fraud confirmed CB-40258,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40264,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40270,I didn't receive what I paid for,21,Chargeback won CB-40276,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40282,I didn't receive what I paid for,17,Merchant refunded CB-40288,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40294,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-40300,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-40306,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40312,I didn't receive what I paid for,20,Merchant refunded CB-40318,I didn't receive what I paid for,26,Chargeback lost CB-40324,Subscription I cancelled,10,Merchant refunded CB-40330,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-40336,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40342,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40348,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,9,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40354,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40360,I was charged twice,9,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40366,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40372,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40378,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40384,I didn't receive what I paid for,14,Merchant refunded CB-40390,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-40396,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40402,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40408,I was charged twice,5,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40414,I didn't receive what I paid for,13,Chargeback lost CB-40420,Subscription I cancelled,11,Chargeback won CB-40426,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40432,I didn't receive what I paid for,13,Chargeback won CB-40438,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,4,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40444,I was charged twice,9,Duplicate refunded CB-40450,I didn't receive what I paid for,18,Chargeback won CB-40456,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-40462,I don't recognise this payment,4,Fraud confirmed CB-40468,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40474,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40480,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,8,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40486,I didn't receive what I paid for,27,Chargeback lost CB-40492,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40498,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40504,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40510,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40516,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-40522,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40528,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,8,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40534,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40540,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40546,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-40552,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40558,I was charged twice,5,Duplicate refunded CB-40564,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40570,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40576,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40582,I didn't receive what I paid for,14,Chargeback lost CB-40588,I didn't receive what I paid for,18,Chargeback lost CB-40594,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40600,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,2,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40606,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40612,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-40618,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,5,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40624,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40630,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40636,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40642,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,11,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40648,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40654,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-40660,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40666,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-40672,I was charged twice,5,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40678,Subscription I cancelled,10,Chargeback won CB-40684,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,9,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40690,Subscription I cancelled,7,Chargeback won CB-40696,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40702,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40708,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40714,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40720,I was charged twice,13,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40726,Subscription I cancelled,13,Chargeback won CB-40732,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-40738,I didn't receive what I paid for,18,Chargeback lost CB-40744,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,8,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40750,I was charged twice,11,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40756,Subscription I cancelled,10,Merchant refunded CB-40762,I was charged twice,7,Duplicate refunded CB-40768,Subscription I cancelled,18,Chargeback won CB-40774,I didn't receive what I paid for,23,Chargeback won CB-40780,I didn't receive what I paid for,7,Chargeback won CB-40786,Subscription I cancelled,5,Chargeback won CB-40792,I didn't receive what I paid for,10,Merchant refunded CB-40798,I was charged twice,9,Duplicate refunded CB-40804,I didn't receive what I paid for,24,Merchant refunded CB-40810,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-40816,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,11,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40822,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40828,Subscription I cancelled,13,Chargeback won CB-40834,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40840,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-40846,Subscription I cancelled,7,Merchant refunded CB-40852,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-40858,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40864,I was charged twice,4,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40870,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40876,I was charged twice,6,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40882,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40888,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40894,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-40900,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40906,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40912,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-40918,I didn't receive what I paid for,21,Chargeback won CB-40924,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40930,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,8,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-40936,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40942,I was charged twice,6,Duplicate refunded CB-40948,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40954,I didn't receive what I paid for,14,Chargeback won CB-40960,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40966,I was charged twice,4,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-40972,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40978,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40984,I didn't receive what I paid for,9,Merchant refunded CB-40990,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-40996,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41002,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41008,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41014,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,2,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41020,I didn't receive what I paid for,27,Chargeback won CB-41026,I didn't receive what I paid for,28,Chargeback won CB-41032,I was charged twice,7,Duplicate refunded CB-41038,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41044,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41050,I don't recognise this payment,4,Fraud confirmed CB-41056,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,11,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41062,I was charged twice,3,Duplicate refunded CB-41068,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-41074,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-41080,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41086,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41092,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41098,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41104,I didn't receive what I paid for,29,Merchant refunded CB-41110,Subscription I cancelled,16,Chargeback won CB-41116,I didn't receive what I paid for,22,Chargeback won CB-41122,I didn't receive what I paid for,13,Chargeback lost CB-41128,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41134,I was charged twice,10,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41140,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41146,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41152,I was charged twice,5,Duplicate refunded CB-41158,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41164,I didn't receive what I paid for,12,Chargeback lost CB-41170,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41176,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,2,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41182,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-41188,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41194,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41200,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41206,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,5,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41212,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41218,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,6,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41224,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41230,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41236,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41242,Subscription I cancelled,9,Merchant refunded CB-41248,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41254,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41260,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41266,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41272,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41278,I didn't receive what I paid for,11,Chargeback lost CB-41284,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41290,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41296,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41302,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41308,I was charged twice,11,Duplicate refunded CB-41314,I didn't receive what I paid for,27,Chargeback won CB-41320,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41326,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,5,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41332,I was charged twice,12,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41338,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41344,I didn't receive what I paid for,17,Merchant refunded CB-41350,I didn't receive what I paid for,21,Chargeback won CB-41356,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41362,Subscription I cancelled,14,Merchant refunded CB-41368,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41374,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41380,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41386,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41392,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41398,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41404,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41410,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41416,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-41422,I was charged twice,12,Duplicate refunded CB-41428,Subscription I cancelled,9,Merchant refunded CB-41434,I was charged twice,6,Duplicate refunded CB-41440,Subscription I cancelled,15,Merchant refunded CB-41446,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-41452,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-41458,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41464,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41470,I was charged twice,6,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41476,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-41482,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41488,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41494,I didn't receive what I paid for,26,Merchant refunded CB-41500,I didn't receive what I paid for,24,Chargeback won CB-41506,Subscription I cancelled,20,Chargeback won CB-41512,I didn't receive what I paid for,29,Merchant refunded CB-41518,Subscription I cancelled,20,Chargeback won CB-41524,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-41530,I was charged twice,3,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41536,I didn't receive what I paid for,8,Chargeback won CB-41542,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41548,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41554,I was charged twice,12,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41560,Subscription I cancelled,6,Chargeback won CB-41566,I was charged twice,3,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41572,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-41578,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,7,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41584,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41590,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41596,Subscription I cancelled,16,Merchant refunded CB-41602,Subscription I cancelled,15,Merchant refunded CB-41608,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41614,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41620,I was charged twice,5,Duplicate refunded CB-41626,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41632,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41638,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,3,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41644,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41650,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41656,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-41662,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41668,I didn't receive what I paid for,12,Chargeback won CB-41674,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41680,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41686,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41692,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41698,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41704,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41710,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41716,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,8,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41722,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41728,I was charged twice,12,Duplicate refunded CB-41734,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,5,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41740,I don't recognise this payment,6,Fraud confirmed CB-41746,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41752,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41758,I was charged twice,13,Duplicate refunded CB-41764,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41770,I didn't receive what I paid for,23,Chargeback won CB-41776,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41782,I didn't receive what I paid for,27,Chargeback won CB-41788,I didn't receive what I paid for,23,Chargeback lost CB-41794,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41800,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-41806,I don't recognise this payment,1,Fraud confirmed CB-41812,I was charged twice,4,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41818,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-41824,I didn't receive what I paid for,18,Chargeback won CB-41830,Subscription I cancelled,13,Chargeback won CB-41836,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41842,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-41848,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41854,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41860,I was charged twice,5,Duplicate refunded CB-41866,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41872,I don't recognise this payment,8,Fraud confirmed CB-41878,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41884,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41890,I was charged twice,7,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-41896,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41902,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,9,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41908,I don't recognise this payment,4,Fraud confirmed CB-41914,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41920,I didn't receive what I paid for,24,Merchant refunded CB-41926,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41932,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41938,Subscription I cancelled,15,Chargeback won CB-41944,I didn't receive what I paid for,13,Chargeback won CB-41950,I don't recognise this payment,2,Fraud confirmed CB-41956,I didn't receive what I paid for,24,Chargeback lost CB-41962,I don't recognise this payment,4,Fraud confirmed CB-41968,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41974,Subscription I cancelled,15,Chargeback won CB-41980,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-41986,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,2,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41992,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,6,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-41998,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42004,I didn't receive what I paid for,12,Merchant refunded CB-42010,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42016,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42022,I was charged twice,11,Duplicate refunded CB-42028,I didn't receive what I paid for,25,Merchant refunded CB-42034,I didn't receive what I paid for,10,Merchant refunded CB-42040,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42046,I was charged twice,8,Duplicate refunded CB-42052,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42058,I don't recognise this payment,7,Fraud confirmed CB-42064,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42070,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42076,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,10,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42082,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42088,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42094,Subscription I cancelled,12,Chargeback won CB-42100,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42106,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42112,Subscription I cancelled,18,Chargeback won CB-42118,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,6,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42124,I don't recognise this payment,5,Fraud confirmed CB-42130,I didn't receive what I paid for,14,Chargeback lost CB-42136,I don't recognise this payment,8,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42142,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,2,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42148,I was charged twice,12,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-42154,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42160,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42166,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42172,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,9,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42178,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-42184,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42190,I was charged twice,7,Duplicate refunded CB-42196,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42202,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42208,I didn't receive what I paid for,21,Chargeback won CB-42214,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42220,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42226,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42232,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42238,I was charged twice,10,Duplicate refunded CB-42244,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42250,Subscription I cancelled,11,Chargeback won CB-42256,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,3,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42262,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42268,I didn't receive what I paid for,16,Merchant refunded CB-42274,I was charged twice,3,Duplicate refunded CB-42280,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,9,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42286,I was charged twice,11,Duplicate refunded CB-42292,I was charged twice,9,Not a duplicate: two separate purchases CB-42298,I don't recognise this payment,6,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42304,I don't recognise this payment,2,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42310,Subscription I cancelled,16,Merchant refunded CB-42316,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42322,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42328,Fraud: I didn't make this payment,3,"Fraud confirmed, refunded" CB-42334,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42340,I don't recognise this payment,1,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42346,I didn't receive what I paid for,19,Merchant refunded CB-42352,I was charged twice,12,Duplicate refunded CB-42358,I don't recognise this payment,3,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42364,I don't recognise this payment,7,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42370,I don't recognise this payment,3,Fraud confirmed CB-42376,I didn't receive what I paid for,17,Chargeback won CB-42382,I don't recognise this payment,4,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42388,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details CB-42394,I don't recognise this payment,5,Customer recognised it once shown the merchant's details
merchant_data_option.md3 lines · Download
# Merchant data we could use

Our card processor offers an enriched merchant feed (trading name, logo, location, website) for 94% of transactions, at $0.0008 per transaction. We process about 9 million card transactions a month.
What a strong answer doesThe answer key the graders mark against

Starts from the data: in the sample, 232 of 400 disputes (58%, so about 1,400 of the quarter's 2,400) were 'I don't recognise this payment', and 169 of those (about three in four) were resolved simply by showing the merchant's details; so the first thing to build is recognisable transactions (trading name, logo, location from the enriched feed, about $7,200 a month for 9 million transactions), shown before someone raises a dispute, with self-serve disputes for the genuine cases. Defines success with targets (disputes per 1,000 transactions, share resolved without an agent, regulator deadlines met against 14% late today) and says which wins when they conflict (never make disputing harder than paying, per the regulator). Covers the flows for genuine disputes (charged twice, not received, cancelled subscription, fraud) with acknowledgement within 2 business days and resolution within 15, what happens when the merchant data is missing (6% of transactions), and how the rollout reaches people, with support ready. Says who it's not for (for example business accounts, or disputes over a set amount that still go to an agent) and what's out of scope.

Critical failures (cap the score at 40)
  • Adds steps that make raising a dispute harder than making a payment
Task

Staff-level · v1.0

The outputs

8 setups answered this brief.

Sonnet 5.5API83Usable with a quick editGPT-6 AstraChatGPT73Needs more workGPT-6 LunaAPI69Needs more workHaiku 5.5API69Needs more workOpus 5.5Claude60Needs more workGPT-6.1 SolAPI58Needs more workGemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemini40Needs more workGemini 3.8 FlashAPI37Needs more work
GPT-6 LunaAPI

Needs more than a quick edit8 of 12 checks passed

The PRD lacks explicit computation of the recognition share, an explicit trade‑off rule, and numeric pilot kill criteria, so a PM would need to rework these sections before handing it off.

Output

PRD: Self-serve card disputes in the Clearbank app

Owner: Card Servicing Delivery: Next quarter Audience: Engineering, Design, Support Operations, Compliance

Summary

Let customers understand an unfamiliar card transaction and, if they still believe it is wrong, raise and track a dispute in the app without first contacting support. The flow should help customers recognise legitimate payments while keeping the route to report a genuine issue clear and easy.

Today, customers raise disputes in chat. Agents collect details, explain the payment or open a chargeback; each dispute takes about 11 minutes. Last quarter there were 2,400 disputes—around 440 agent hours—and 14% were resolved later than the regulator’s deadline. The sample of 400 disputes also shows a recurring opportunity: many customers who said they did not recognise a payment later recognised it when shown merchant details. The current transaction descriptor may show a billing name, such as “SQ *BRKLYN BAGEL 0412”, rather than the trading name a customer knows.

Problem and opportunity

Customers cannot reliably identify a payment from its billing descriptor, so some contact support unnecessarily. Customers with genuine disputes face a chat-based intake and may not receive timely updates. Support must collect information manually and manage deadlines across cases.

The processor’s enriched merchant feed provides a trading name, logo, location and website for 94% of transactions. At $0.0008 per transaction, applying it to the eligible share of approximately 9 million monthly transactions would cost about $6,768 per month (subject to the vendor’s billing basis). This is a material ongoing cost; we should measure whether the enrichment improves recognition and reduces support demand.

Goals and success measures

  1. Reduce avoidable agent work while preserving a simple route to dispute.
  2. Give customers a clear, trackable way to report a genuine card-payment problem.
  3. Meet the regulator’s acknowledgement and resolution-or-delay-notice requirements.

Proposed launch targets, measured over the first 90 days against a pre-launch baseline: - Reduce support-handled dispute contacts per 1,000 card transactions by 30%. - Acknowledge at least 95% of in-app disputes within 2 business days. - For at least 95% of genuine disputes, resolve within 15 business days or send a clear explanation that the case is taking longer, with the next update expectation. - No material increase in complaints, reopened cases, confirmed fraud loss, or customers abandoning a genuine dispute compared with baseline.

Track the number of customers who recognise a payment, continue to raise a dispute, abandon at each step, contact support after submitting, and the cost and coverage of enriched merchant data. Segment outcomes by dispute reason and whether merchant enrichment was available. The sample is useful evidence of the recognition problem, but it is not a substitute for a live baseline or a causal estimate of savings.

Users and scope

Primary users: Clearbank personal current-account customers with a debit-card transaction they do not understand or believe is incorrect.

In scope for MVP: A dispute journey launched from an eligible card transaction; merchant context; guided reason selection and information capture; case submission and acknowledgement; in-app status and updates; operational case routing and SLA monitoring.

Out of scope: Replacing the chargeback process, guaranteeing refunds, automated denial of claims, disputes for non-card payment types, and a general-purpose support-chat redesign.

Proposed experience

  1. Start from the transaction. Put a visible “Get help with this payment” action on eligible card transaction details. Do not require customers to find a separate disputes area or contact chat. Eligibility must be determined by Compliance and Operations using applicable scheme and processing rules. If a transaction cannot be disputed in-app, explain why and provide a clear alternative support route; never leave the customer at a dead end.
  1. Help identify the merchant. Show the enriched trading name and, when available and reliable, logo, location and website alongside the original billing descriptor, amount and date. Do not imply that a logo or website proves the customer made the purchase. If data is unavailable, show the billing descriptor and explain that the merchant may use a different name. Do not make merchant lookup a prerequisite to reporting.
  1. Let the customer choose what happened. Offer plain-language reasons, including “I don’t recognise this”, “I was charged twice”, “I didn’t receive what I paid for”, “I cancelled a subscription”, and “I didn’t make this payment”. Keep “I don’t recognise this” distinct from confirmed fraud. Ask only the follow-up questions needed for the selected reason—for example, whether the customer contacted the merchant or when they cancelled. Explain why requested information helps, and allow submission without optional evidence.
  1. Offer relevant help without blocking a claim. If the customer recognises the merchant, offer a simple way to exit without opening a case. For suspected fraud, offer an immediate card-freeze action and explain that freezing the card is separate from reporting the transaction. Never require a freeze, merchant contact, or troubleshooting step before the customer can submit.
  1. Confirm and track. On successful submission, show a case reference, the reported transaction and reason, confirmation that the dispute has been received, and what happens next. Provide a case status and updates in the app, with notifications where enabled. If further information is required, explain what is needed and how to provide it. Do not suggest a refund is guaranteed or that a chargeback has already been won.

Operational and compliance requirements

  • The system must record submission and acknowledgement timestamps, customer-provided details, case status, decisions, communications and audit history.
  • An in-app receipt should serve as acknowledgement only if Compliance confirms it meets the applicable acknowledgement requirement. Otherwise, send a compliant acknowledgement within 2 business days.
  • Operations needs a queue with reason, age, owner, priority and deadlines, plus alerts before SLA breaches. Cases should not silently age in a queue.
  • Genuine disputes must be resolved within 15 business days, or the customer must be told why it is taking longer. The message must include the reason and a meaningful next update expectation; Operations must continue to monitor the case.
  • Any classification or routing automation may assist staff but must not automatically reject a claim. A customer who disagrees with a suggested explanation must still be able to proceed.
  • The journey must be accessible, use clear language, and not be harder to reach or complete than making a payment. Store and share customer and merchant data only for appropriate servicing purposes, with vendor use, security and retention reviewed by Compliance.

Dependencies and open decisions

Before build completion, Compliance and Operations must confirm eligible transaction types, claim deadlines, reason-specific evidence needs, the definition of “genuine dispute” for reporting, and the compliant wording for acknowledgements and delay notices. Engineering must confirm processor-feed availability, fallback behaviour, case-system integration, and reliable business-day SLA calculation. Product and Finance should agree an enrichment pilot or rollout threshold using recognition, contact reduction, coverage and vendor cost; the feed’s 6% coverage gap needs a tested fallback.

Rollout and risks

Pilot with a limited customer cohort after internal testing of each dispute reason, merchant-data failures, duplicate submissions, accessibility and SLA alerts. Compare pilot outcomes with a pre-launch baseline before expanding. Key risks are customers mistaking a legitimate merchant for fraud, poor enrichment data, confusing a submitted claim with a guaranteed refund, and moving work from chat into an unmanaged queue. Mitigate through clear descriptors and caveats, an always-available dispute route, explicit case status, operational ownership and deadline monitoring.

Grades and run details

Decision model 83 · LLM judge 62
Decision model checks
  • passUses the supplied evidence correctly47%
  • passAddresses the actual decision39%
  • partialRespects explicit constraints57%
  • passIdentifies material uncertainty68%
  • passAvoids unsupported claims50%
  • partialProduces the required deliverable34%
  • partialFinds that most disputes are recognition71%
  • passBuilds the regulator's rules in97%
  • passSuccess settles trade-offs92%
  • partialProposes tests that could fail76%
  • passSays who it's for, and who it isn't30%
  • passPlans how people will find it64%
Run
Run
#1
API response time
32 s
Submitted
6 Oct 2026
Opus 5.5Claude

Needs more than a quick edit6 of 12 checks passed

The PRD contains an inconsistent statistic (42% vs 48%) and lacks explicit trade-off rules, user definition, and rollout plan, requiring more than a quick edit.

Output

PRD: Self-serve card disputes in the app

Owner: PM, Card Servicing · Squad: Engineering, Design, Support Ops, Compliance · Target: next quarter

1. Summary

Customers can only raise a card dispute today by chatting with support. An agent spends about 11 minutes on each one. Last quarter there were 2,400 disputes, which is roughly 440 agent hours, and 14% were resolved after the regulator's deadline.

This project lets customers raise and track disputes from the transaction screen. It answers the most common question ("what is this payment?") before a dispute is needed. Every case that does need an agent arrives fully documented.

The most important finding: 42% of disputes aren't really disputes. The customer didn't recognise a merchant billing name. However, the late-resolution problem sits in a different group of cases, so the project has to solve both.

2. What the data says

These figures come from a random sample of 400 of last quarter's 2,400 disputes.

Customer saidShareOutcomesResolved in >15 days
I don't recognise this payment58% (232)169 recognised it once shown merchant details; 63 fraud0
I didn't receive what I paid for14% (56)24 chargeback won, 15 lost, 17 merchant refunded36 (64%)
I was charged twice12% (48)24 genuine duplicates, 24 separate purchases0
Fraud: I didn't make this payment9% (36)All confirmed and refunded0
Subscription I cancelled7% (28)18 chargeback won, 10 merchant refunded8 (29%)

What this means:

  1. Most disputes can be answered with information. 169 "don't recognise" cases plus 24 "not a duplicate" cases make 48% of disputes. These ended with the customer understanding a payment they had made. The cause is that we show billing names like "SQ \*BRKLYN BAGEL 0412" instead of the trading name.
  2. "Don't recognise" is also a real fraud channel. 27% of those cases were fraud. Fraud from both reasons combined is about 25% of all disputes. Any feature that explains payments must never slow down a customer who is genuinely a victim.
  3. Late resolutions are all chargebacks. Every sample case that took more than 15 days was a "not received" or "subscription" dispute. Deflecting unrecognised payments will cut agent time, but it won't fix the deadline problem. That needs its own work (section 4.5).
  4. Many merchant disputes end with the merchant refunding. This happened in 30% of "not received" cases and 36% of subscription cases.

3. Goals and non-goals

Goals - Customers can raise any dispute in the app, with no chat required. - Fewer disputes raised for payments the customer actually made. - Every chargeback case is either resolved within 15 business days or the customer is told why not, with no exceptions. - Less agent time per dispute.

Non-goals (v1) - Automated chargeback decisions or automatic refunds. Agents still decide every case. - Disputes on non-card payments. - Changing how chargebacks are filed with the card scheme.

4. Requirements

4.1 Entry point

  • R1. Every card transaction's detail screen has a "Problem with this payment?" action.
  • R2. The customer picks one of five reasons, matching today's categories: don't recognise it, I didn't make it (fraud), charged twice, didn't receive it, cancelled subscription.
  • R3. Compliance constraint. Raising a dispute must never take more steps than making a payment. Design will count taps for each path against our card payment and transfer flows. Compliance must sign off on the counts before launch. Every explanation screen below is shown alongside the dispute action, never in front of it.

4.2 "I don't recognise this payment"

  • R4. Show enriched merchant details: trading name, logo, location and website. Also show the customer's previous payments to the same merchant.
  • R5. The same screen offers two equally weighted buttons: "I recognise it now" and "I still don't recognise it".
  • R6. "I still don't recognise it" goes straight to the fraud path (4.3). It asks no further questions.
  • R7. If no enrichment exists (about 6% of transactions), show the raw billing name, merchant category and location from the transaction record. The flow is otherwise unchanged.

4.3 Fraud

  • R8. Offer to freeze the card on the first screen of the fraud path. The customer can decline.
  • R9. Let the customer flag other transactions on the same card as unauthorised in the same submission.
  • R10. The case goes to the fraud queue at high priority.

4.4 Charged twice / not received / subscription

  • R11. Charged twice. Show the two transactions side by side, with time, amount, location and card-present status. Half of these cases were separate purchases. The customer can still continue to raise the dispute.
  • R12. Not received / subscription. Ask structured questions instead of using a chat:
  • expected delivery date or cancellation date
  • whether the customer has contacted the merchant
  • optional uploads (cancellation email, receipt, screenshots)

These questions should capture everything an agent needs for a chargeback. - R13. Show the merchant's website and suggest contacting them, since merchants refunded in about a third of cases. This is optional and must not delay submission.

4.5 Acknowledgement, tracking and deadlines

  • R14. Submitting a dispute triggers an in-app and email acknowledgement immediately, with a case reference. This meets the 2-business-day rule automatically.
  • R15. The customer gets a dispute status screen showing:
  • the reason they gave
  • current stage
  • expected resolution date
  • any temporary credit
  • R16. The system counts business days from submission. At business day 10, any open case gets flagged in the agent queue. By business day 14, the agent must choose a delay reason, for example "awaiting merchant response to chargeback". The customer is then notified with that reason in plain language. If no reason is chosen, the case escalates to the team lead.
  • R17. Every notification is logged against the case for audit.

4.6 Support operations

  • R18. In-app cases enter the existing dispute queue already populated with:
  • the reason
  • the answers to the structured questions
  • attachments
  • which explanation screens the customer saw
  • R19. Chat stays available. Agents can start the same structured flow on a customer's behalf, so every case looks the same in the queue.

5. Merchant data feed: cost needs resolving before build

The processor's enriched feed covers 94% of transactions at $0.0008 each. On all ~9M monthly transactions that is $7,200/month, or $21,600/quarter.

The feed is very unlikely to pay for itself through dispute savings alone. Using the sample rates, about 1,014 disputes a quarter were "recognised once shown details". At 11 minutes each, that is around 186 agent hours. To save $21,600, an agent hour would have to cost over $115, and that assumes every one of those disputes is prevented.

The feed may still be worth it. Clearer names on every transaction could reduce "what is this?" chats that never became disputes, and that number isn't in this data. But the full-feed price needs a business case of its own.

Action: Engineering and the PM will ask the processor whether enrichment can be bought per lookup. We would only call it when a customer opens a transaction or starts a dispute. At that volume the cost would be trivial. If per-lookup isn't available, I'll bring the full-feed decision to Imogen with Support's numbers on unrecognised-payment chats.

6. Success metrics

MetricBaselineTarget (one quarter after launch)
Disputes raised via app (vs chat)0%≥70%
"Don't recognise" disputes ending as "customer recognised it"73% of that reason<25% (resolved earlier by R4/R5 instead)
Chargeback cases past 15 business days with no delay noticeUnknown0
Disputes resolved after the deadline14%<5%
Agent minutes per dispute11≤5

Guardrails. These protect customers from being deflected when they shouldn't be: - Fraud reported late. Track fraud reported within 60 days on transactions where the customer tapped "I recognise it now". Any increase triggers a design review. - Abandoned flows. Track the rate of dispute flows started but not submitted, broken down by reason. - Tap counts. Keep tap-count parity with the payment flow (R3) and recheck it on every release.

7. Open questions

  1. Units of `daystoresolve`. Are these business or calendar days? The analysis above assumes business days. If they are calendar days, fewer cases breach the deadline.
  2. Gap between 11% and 14%. The sample shows 11% of cases over 15 days, while the background doc says 14%. This could be sampling noise. It could also mean cases are being counted late when a delay notice was sent, or not sent. Support Ops, please confirm how the 14% is calculated.
  3. Refunds on "don't recognise" fraud cases. These are recorded as "Fraud confirmed", while direct fraud claims are recorded as "Fraud confirmed, refunded". Compliance, please confirm all of those customers were refunded.
  4. Feed pricing. Is per-lookup pricing for the merchant feed available (section 5)?
  5. Temporary credit policy. Should we credit the customer while a chargeback is pending, and when? Compliance and Finance to decide before design finalises R15.

Claims the judge couldn’t find in the brief

  • 42% of disputes aren't really disputes.

Grades and run details

Decision model 79 · LLM judge 46
Decision model checks
  • passUses the supplied evidence correctly19%
  • passAddresses the actual decision36%
  • partialRespects explicit constraints58%
  • passIdentifies material uncertainty98%
  • partialAvoids unsupported claims36%
  • passProduces the required deliverable28%
  • passFinds that most disputes are recognition86%
  • passBuilds the regulator's rules in95%
  • passSuccess settles trade-offs99%
  • partialProposes tests that could fail77%
  • partialSays who it's for, and who it isn't36%
  • partialPlans how people will find it77%
Run
Run
#1
Time to output
1.9 min
Submitted
6 Oct 2026
GPT-6.1 SolAPI

Needs more than a quick edit5 of 12 checks passed

The PRD lacks the exact 58% recognition share from the data and a discovery plan, requiring a PM to re-check the sample and fill those gaps before use.

Output

PRD: Self-serve card disputes

Owner: Card Servicing PM Delivery: Next quarter Audience: Engineering, Design, Support Operations, Compliance Status: Proposed; regulatory interpretation and merchant-data commercial approval required

1. Problem and product decision

Customers currently dispute card payments through support chat. Agents explain unfamiliar payments or collect information and open a chargeback. Last quarter, 2,400 disputes required approximately 440 agent hours at 11 minutes each. Support identifies disputes as its biggest cost after card freezes. More importantly, 14% were resolved after the regulatory deadline.

The 400-case random sample shows two distinct needs:

  • Understanding a payment: Unrecognised payments are the largest category, and many customers recognise them after seeing merchant details. Some suspected duplicates are actually separate purchases.
  • Getting a genuine problem investigated: Unrecognised payments also include confirmed fraud. Non-receipt and cancelled-subscription cases can take longer; several non-receipt cases took 17–29 days.

Today’s billing descriptors, such as “SQ *BRKLYN BAGEL 0412”, contribute to confusion.

Decision: Build a payment-detail-led experience that helps customers recognise legitimate transactions, then lets them report unresolved problems without contacting an agent. Pair this with case tracking and deadline controls. This is not an automated chargeback adjudication project.

2. Goals and success measures

Proposed targets for the first full quarter after rollout, subject to baseline validation:

  • Reduce total dispute-related agent minutes by 30%, normalised for card-transaction volume. At current volume, this represents approximately 132 hours per quarter.
  • Submit at least 60% of new card disputes through self-service, without requiring support chat.
  • Acknowledge 100% within two business days.
  • Resolve genuine disputes within 15 business days, or provide an individual explanation before that deadline; target zero missed obligations.
  • Reduce clarification-only contacts without increasing repeat reports, complaints or incorrectly closed cases.

Track completion time, abandonment by step, support handoffs, evidence completeness, repeat contacts and resolution outcomes by reason. Measure recognition using an explicit customer confirmation—not abandonment.

The existing 14% late-resolution figure is the operational baseline, not necessarily a measured regulatory-breach rate: the export does not show business-day calculations or extension communications.

3. Scope and priorities

Must ship

  • “Get help with this payment” on card-transaction details.
  • Merchant clarification with available enriched details.
  • Structured reporting for unrecognised payments, suspected fraud, duplicates, non-receipt and cancelled subscriptions.
  • “Something else” and accessible human-support routes.
  • Durable case creation, immediate acknowledgement, operational routing and deadline monitoring.
  • In-app case status, information requests and outcome communications.

Not in scope

Automated liability decisions, automatic chargeback submission, a replacement chargeback platform, bank-transfer disputes, or a broad redesign of card freezes. Use existing investigation, refund and card-security processes.

Customers with unsupported scenarios must still be able to raise a report; scope boundaries must not become silent rejection rules.

4. Customer experience requirements

A. Clarify the payment

Show the original billing descriptor, amount, date, payment status and, where available, merchant trading name, logo, location and website on transaction details.

For “I don’t recognise this payment”, offer two equally clear actions: “I recognise it now” and “Report a problem”. Clarification is optional, not a mandatory gate. An explicit fraud report bypasses recognition prompts.

Never imply that an enriched merchant match proves authorisation. Preserve original details, label uncertain information appropriately, and provide “These details look wrong”. If enrichment is unavailable or fails, reporting remains available.

For suspected duplicates, show relevant nearby transactions side by side, including pending versus completed status. Do not close a report because two purchases look similar; only the customer can confirm recognition.

B. Capture the problem

Prefill transaction and customer details. Ask only reason-specific questions:

  • Unrecognised/fraud: whether the customer authorised the payment and any useful context; route unresolved unrecognised reports for fraud assessment.
  • Duplicate: identify the other transaction, if known.
  • Non-receipt: expected delivery/service date and what was purchased.
  • Cancelled subscription: cancellation date and available confirmation.
  • Other: short free-text description.

Offer evidence uploads, but allow submission without documents and explain that further information may be requested. Record merchant-contact history where relevant; do not require customers to contact a merchant before reporting.

A short review screen leads to submission. Preserve answers during interruptions and support handoffs. Do not make customers repeat information already supplied.

C. Protect customers reporting fraud

Offer the existing card-freeze action and explain its effect. Reporting must not depend on freezing the card. Apply existing fraud-escalation procedures, including urgent human assistance where needed.

Submission must not promise a refund, imply that all fraud follows chargeback rules, or defer any applicable refund obligation until investigation completion. Compliance must approve this wording and routing.

D. Confirm and track

On successful durable receipt, show the case reference, reported transaction, acknowledgement, next step and expected update date. Provide an in-app message, with push notification as a supplement.

Customers can view status, add information and contact support from the case. Outcomes explain the decision, any refund and how to challenge it. A chargeback loss must not automatically determine the customer’s entitlement.

5. Operational and technical requirements

Create cases in the existing operational workflow with customer ID, transaction ID, reason, answers, attachments, reporting timestamp, owner and deadline fields. Support receives a readable summary rather than an unstructured transcript.

Requirements:

  • Reliable submission: retries must not create duplicate cases. Existing cases link customers to tracking while permitting additional information.
  • Cross-channel continuity: connect app and chat reports; preserve the earliest received report timestamp.
  • Deadline engine: calculate business days using Compliance-approved calendars and rules. Neither requests for evidence nor internal handoffs reset the clock.
  • Escalation: alert the responsible team before acknowledgement and resolution deadlines; escalate unowned or overdue cases.
  • Extension communications: require a meaningful reason and next update date before day 15 when unresolved. Generic status updates do not satisfy this requirement.
  • Auditability: retain report history, decisions, customer communications and delivery records under approved retention rules.
  • Security: enforce account ownership, secure attachments, malware scanning, least-privilege access and redaction of sensitive analytics.
  • Accessibility: support screen readers, scalable text and plain language; keep human assistance available throughout.

If submission fails, never show success. Retain entered information and offer support with context. Queue downstream processing only after durable receipt.

6. Merchant-data decision and economics

The processor offers enrichment for 94% of transactions at $0.0008 per transaction. Across nine million monthly transactions, a full feed costs approximately $7,200 monthly, or $21,600 quarterly, excluding integration costs.

Coverage is not accuracy. Engineering and Design must validate matching quality, latency, caching and fallback behaviour. Procurement must confirm whether selective lookup or a limited pilot is commercially possible; neither is assumed.

Do not justify the full feed solely through the 440-hour support baseline: we lack loaded hourly costs and evidence of achieved deflection. Approve full-feed spend only with a business case covering support savings and broader customer benefits. If approval slips, ship reporting and deadline controls using existing merchant information rather than delay safer dispute handling.

7. Delivery, validation and launch gates

Weeks 1–2: Design tests recognition, fraud and reporting journeys with customers; Support Operations validates routing and workload. Compliance approves clock rules, acknowledgement, extension wording, refund obligations and reporting-access requirements. Engineering confirms case-system and feed dependencies.

Weeks 3–8: Build transaction help, reason-based intake, case integration, tracking and deadline controls. Instrument journeys without capturing sensitive free text.

Weeks 9–12: Run end-to-end tests and a limited customer rollout, then expand if gates pass.

Release acceptance requires demonstrated:

  • Submission despite missing enrichment or evidence.
  • Accessible fraud reporting without recognition or merchant-contact gates.
  • Correct weekend/holiday deadlines and pre-deadline escalation.
  • Idempotent retries and cross-channel continuity.
  • Recoverable outages, secure attachments and usable support handoffs.

Support Operations owns queue coverage and escalation response; Compliance signs off controls; Engineering owns reliability; Design owns accessibility and comprehension.

Compare pilot and control cohorts on agent minutes, clarification contacts and repeat reports. Do not withhold required protections from controls. Pause expansion for deadline failures, misrouting, data exposure or evidence that customers cannot report genuine problems. A feature rollback must preserve submitted cases, monitoring and human-support access.

Grades and run details

Decision model 83 · LLM judge 38
Decision model checks
  • passUses the supplied evidence correctly50%
  • passAddresses the actual decision81%
  • partialRespects explicit constraints38%
  • passIdentifies material uncertainty99%
  • passAvoids unsupported claims59%
  • passProduces the required deliverable67%
  • partialFinds that most disputes are recognition31%
  • passBuilds the regulator's rules in96%
  • passSuccess settles trade-offs96%
  • partialProposes tests that could fail65%
  • partialSays who it's for, and who it isn't52%
  • passPlans how people will find it27%
Run
Run
#1
API response time
73 s
Submitted
6 Oct 2026

Check by check

Where the outputs differ comes first. Open a check to read the judge’s reasons. “Mixed” means the two graders disagreed.

Where they differ 5

Uses the supplied evidence correctlyRightMixedMixed
GPT-6 Luna · API

All factual statements about the current situation are taken from the brief or context, or follow directly from arithmetic.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The output claims 42% of disputes aren't really disputes, but the sample data yields 48%; this fact about the current situation is incorrect and unsupported.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The output states 'Today’s billing descriptors ... contribute to confusion' as a fact about the current situation, but this causal claim is not present in the brief and is not labelled as an assumption; it is an unsupported interpretation.

Avoids unsupported claimsRightWrongMixed
GPT-6 Luna · API

Interpretations and forecasts are presented as proposals or measurements to be taken, not as established facts.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The '42% of disputes aren't really disputes' claim is presented as a confident finding but is not supported by the data (actual is 48%).

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The causal claim that billing descriptors contribute to confusion is presented as an established fact without hedging, while the evidence only shows that many customers do not recognise payments.

Finds that most disputes are recognitionWrongRightWrong
GPT-6 Luna · API

The PRD does not compute the exact share (≈58%) or the number resolved by showing merchant details, only describes it as 'many'.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The PRD computes the 58% share and 73% resolved by showing merchant details, and makes recognisable transactions the first scope item (R4/R5).

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The PRD does not compute the exact share (58% = 232/400) or how many were resolved by showing merchant details, only stating that unrecognised payments are the largest category.

Says who it's for, and who it isn'tMixedWrongWrong
GPT-6 Luna · API

The PRD names target users (personal current‑account customers) but does not explicitly exclude a user group like business accounts; 'non‑card payment types' is a payment type exclusion, not a user group.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The PRD does not name the target users (individuals) or explicitly exclude any user group (e.g., business accounts), and no scope decision visibly follows from such an exclusion.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The PRD does not name the target users (e.g., individual current account holders) nor explicitly exclude a group (e.g., business accounts), and no scope decision visibly follows from such an exclusion.

Plans how people will find itRightWrongMixed
GPT-6 Luna · API

It gives a staged rollout (pilot then expand), a discovery method (button on transaction), and names support operations as needing readiness.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

No staged rollout, user discovery method, or support readiness plan is described beyond agents being able to start the flow.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

It gives a staged rollout and identifies support ops, compliance, engineering, and design as ready teams, but does not state how users will discover the self-serve dispute feature in the app.

All got wrong 1

Proposes tests that could failWrongWrongWrong
GPT-6 Luna · API

The pilot is described without a numeric kill threshold, measurement window, or the action each outcome would trigger.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

Only one guardrail (fraud reported late) has a threshold and action; other metrics lack thresholds, measurement windows, and actions for each outcome.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

Release acceptance criteria are qualitative (e.g., 'demonstrated submission despite missing enrichment'), with no numeric thresholds or measurement windows and only a vague expansion pause condition.

All mixed 1

Success settles trade-offsMixedMixedMixed
GPT-6 Luna · API

Success metrics with targets are set, but no explicit trade‑off rule states which goal wins when two conflict.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

Success metrics have targets and time frame, but no explicit trade-off rule is given (e.g., which goal wins when they conflict).

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

While success metrics with targets and timeframe are given, there is no explicit trade-off rule stating which goal wins when they conflict (e.g., self-service volume vs. resolution speed).

All got right 5

Addresses the actual decisionRightRightRight
GPT-6 Luna · API

The output commits early to building self‑serve disputes with enriched merchant recognition, framed for the squad, and implies the pilot outcome will decide expansion.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The PRD commits to building self-serve disputes with merchant recognition first, and says what would change the feed decision (per-lookup pricing).

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The output commits to a clear product decision (payment-detail-led experience, self-serve reporting, deadline controls) and specifies what would change the approach (merchant-data commercial approval).

Respects explicit constraintsRightRightRight
GPT-6 Luna · API

The PRD is within length, addresses the named squad, never makes disputing harder than paying, and respects all given constraints.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The PRD is within 1,000-1,400 words, addresses the squad, and includes R3 to enforce that disputing is never harder than paying.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The PRD is within 1,000–1,400 words, addresses the squad (engineering, design, support ops, compliance), and builds in measures to keep disputing no harder than paying (optional clarification, no mandatory merchant contact).

Identifies material uncertaintyRightRightRight
GPT-6 Luna · API

It lists open compliance, engineering, and product decisions, acknowledges the sample is not a causal baseline, and calls for a pilot to resolve key uncertainties.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

Open questions name specific unknowns (days_to_resolve units, 11% vs 14% gap, feed pricing, temporary credit) and how to resolve them.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

The output names unknowns (regulatory interpretation needed, merchant-data commercial approval, coverage vs. accuracy, baseline validation) and states how they would affect the plan (e.g., ship without full feed if approval slips).

Produces the required deliverableRightRightRight
GPT-6 Luna · API

The output is a complete PRD addressed to the squad, within 1,000–1,400 words, and provides enough substance for the team to act on with light refinement.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

The PRD is complete, in the right form, within length, and the squad could act on it with the open questions resolved.

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

A complete PRD is delivered for the named squad, containing problem, decision, scope, UX, operational requirements, and rollout plan, within the requested word count.

Builds the regulator's rules inRightRightRight
GPT-6 Luna · API

All three regulatory rules (acknowledge ≤2 days, resolve ≤15 days or explain, no harder than paying) appear as testable requirements.

Opus 5.5 · Claude

All three rules appear as testable requirements: R14 (acknowledge within 2 days), R16 (resolve within 15 or explain), R3 (no harder than paying).

GPT-6.1 Sol · API

All three regulator rules are turned into testable requirements: acknowledge within 2 business days, resolve within 15 or explain, and disputing not harder than paying (optional clarification, bypass, no forced merchant contact).

Results

Every setup we’ve tested on this task type, across all its tasks and repeats, graded on the current checklist. Calibrated. Where our PM checked the graders by hand, they agreed on 70% of 81 checks.

#Model · HarnessTask scoreDecision modelLLM judgeRunsCritical failures
1GPT-6 AstraChatGPT87.184.62None
2Sonnet 5.5API75.979.82None
3GPT-6.1 SolAPI82.660.92None
4Haiku 5.5API76.163.82None
5Opus 5.5Claude75.960.62None
6GPT-6 LunaAPI75.859.92None
7Gemini 3.8 FlashAPI49.828.22None
8Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGemini49.832.12None

What you get for the cost

No setup scores within 5 points of the leader at half its cost or less here, so the leader is also the best value.

Task score against relative cost for each setup. The table below has the same figures.304050607080901001×3×10×30×100×Cost per output, relative to the cheapest setup (log scale) →↑ Task scoreGPT-6 Astra · ChatGPT: task score 84, 106× the cheapest (1 of 2 outputs estimated)Sonnet 5.5 · API: task score 77, 35× the cheapestGPT-6.1 Sol · API: task score 71, 14× the cheapestHaiku 5.5 · API: task score 67, the cheapestOpus 5.5 · Claude: task score 65, 85× the cheapest (1 of 2 outputs estimated)GPT-6 Luna · API: task score 65, the cheapestGemini 3.8 Flash · API: task score 39, 9.9× the cheapestGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite · Gemini: task score 39, 4.4× the cheapest (1 of 2 outputs estimated)GPT-6 Astra · ChatGPTSonnet 5.5 · APIGPT-6.1 Sol · APIHaiku 5.5 · APIOpus 5.5 · ClaudeGPT-6 Luna · APIGemini 3.8 Flash · APIGemini 3.5 Flash-Lite · Gemini
Nobody beats these on both score and costCost partly estimated (app runs with no usage meter)

Cost is each output’s tokens at the model’s list price, shown relative to the cheapest setup. Runs done in an app have no usage meter, so theirs are estimated from the same setup’s measured runs. How we compare cost

The PM job

Writing the requirements document a team will build and test against.

Why it matters

A PRD is where ambiguity becomes either a decision or a bug. For AI products it must also say what happens when the model is uncertain or wrong. Most generated PRDs skip that part.

What good looks like

  • States the user problem and the decision the PRD enables
  • Specifies behaviour under uncertainty, failure and refusal
  • Names eval criteria and a launch bar
  • Defines success precisely enough to settle trade-offs
  • Says what is out of scope

Deliberately not measured

  • Formatting or template conformance
  • Length
  • Visual polish of diagrams
Capability tested

Making product behaviour, uncertainty and eval requirements executable

The failure we’re looking for

A generic feature spec that ignores AI failure behaviour

Grading

Decision model and LLM judge, calibrated against a blind PM review

Variants

AI product PRD (core) · Conventional product PRD