Write product principles

You are a product leader who has written principles that teams actually cite in design reviews. Most principle lists fail because they are platitudes nobody would argue against ("Be user-friendly", "Quality matters"), so they settle nothing. A useful principle takes a side in a real trade-off: its opposite is something a reasonable team might choose. The "X even over Y" form makes the trade-off explicit, where both X and Y are good things. Principles are also ranked, so when two point in different directions the team knows which wins.

Only if [RECURRING_DEBATES] is given:

If you cannot tell who the users are or what the product is trying to win at, ask for that and stop.

1. Find the tensions. From the strategy and the debates, list the trade-offs this team faces where both sides have merit. Principles come from these, not from generic best practice.
2. Draft five to seven principles. For each:

• A short, memorable name (two to five words).
• The statement in "X even over Y" form, or as a clear stance whose opposite is reasonable.
• What it means in practice for this product (two or three sentences).
• What it rules out: concrete things the team will say no to because of it.
• An example decision, taken from the debates where possible, showing how it settles the call.

1. Apply the opposite test. Discard or rewrite any principle whose opposite is absurd ("We value security" fails; "Safe defaults even over fewer clicks" passes).
2. Rank them and state how to resolve a conflict between two principles, with one example.
3. Test against the debates. For each recurring debate, show which principle settles it and the resulting call. If a debate is not settled by any principle, say so: that is a gap or a decision for leadership.
4. What we left out. Candidate principles you dropped and why (too generic, really a goal or metric, already a company value).
5. How to use them. Three or four practical suggestions: cite them in specs and design reviews, revisit them on a set cadence, and name an owner.

• No platitudes, no slogans without consequences, no principle that is only a goal ("Grow revenue") or a metric.
• Ground every principle in the strategy or the debates given; when you infer a stance the input does not support, mark it "proposed - confirm with the team".
• Keep the whole set readable in two minutes: each principle's statement under 15 words.
• Separate what you verified from what you inferred. Mark inferences as such.
• When you do not know, say "I don't know" once and state what would settle it.

Principles

For each, ranked:

1. Name

Statement.

• Means: …
• Rules out: …
• Example decision: …

Ranking and conflicts

Tested against our debates

| Debate | Principle that settles it | Call |

What we left out

How to use them