tacigent-stage-problem

To frame an evidence-backed problem, define the problem using a method-first protocol, document the plan in a JSON artifact, and generate 3-6 candidate problems across user segments and JTBD. This ensures rigorous problem synthesis and readiness gating.

The problem-formulation protocol enforces source-class research, minimum evidence coverage, and hot-signal bias. It requires performing five rounds of critique and readiness evaluation to surface a canonical problem selection.

Conduct source-class research by following the prescribed research protocol to gather evidence across user segments, failure moments, and pain clusters. This process ensures adequate evidence coverage and biases findings toward hot signals.

Yes, this method-first framing applies to projects requiring rigorous problem framing, evidence synthesis, and canonical owner assignment across stages. It guides problem selection and enforces readiness criteria.

Without readiness gates, problem framing lacks enforced critique cycles and evidence-ladder evaluation, risking poorly synthesized problem wedges. This leads to inadequate readiness evaluation and weak canonical problem selection.

Five review cycles are required to rigorously critique candidate problems against readiness gates and an evidence ladder. This iterative evaluation surfaces the most viable canonical selection for the problem wedge.