Artefato Prova
AI Builder Reality Check para marketers
Decida se você está pronto para construir a primeira fatia útil de um produto de IA, e identifique o que vai quebrar primeiro se começar agora.
Melhor paraMarketers usando Claude Code, Codex, v0, Replit ou ferramentas parecidas, mas sem lançar com consistência · Operators com protótipos mas sem caminho real de usuário · Senior marketers decidindo se continuam power users de IA ou viram builders · Consultores transformando expertise em um pequeno produto ou ferramenta interna
Campos do template
- User and painful job
- First useful slice
- Proof that someone wants it
- Current artifact or prototype
- Weakest assumption
- Data or workflow dependency
- Review standard
- Launch risk
- Next 14-day build commitment
Exemplo preenchido
A marketer trying to build an internal campaign QA assistant.
Os exemplos preenchidos abaixo ficam em inglês porque o Prova revisa artifacts enviados em inglês.
Versão fraca vs versão forte
Versão fraca
- User
- Marketing team
- First useful slice
- AI assistant for campaign QA
- Proof
- Everyone says QA is annoying
- Weakest assumption
- Need better prompts
- Launch risk
- Bugs
- 14-day commitment
- Build MVP
| User | Marketing team |
|---|---|
| First useful slice | AI assistant for campaign QA |
| Proof | Everyone says QA is annoying |
| Weakest assumption | Need better prompts |
| Launch risk | Bugs |
| 14-day commitment | Build MVP |
Por que falha
- "Marketing team" is not a user.
- "AI assistant" is too broad.
- The proof is hearsay, not behavior.
- The weakest assumption ignores source data, approval rules, and workflow ownership.
- "Build MVP" is not a commitment.
Versão forte
- User
- Paid media manager checking campaign launch settings before client approval
- First useful slice
- A checklist reviewer that compares campaign setup notes against required client launch rules
- Proof
- Two managers already use a manual spreadsheet before every launch; mistakes still reach strategist review
- Current artifact
- One sample launch checklist, three anonymized campaign setup notes, and one failed QA example
- Weakest assumption
- The checklist rules are explicit enough for AI to evaluate without platform access
- Data/workflow dependency
- Client launch rules, platform screenshots, naming conventions, approval owner
- Review standard
- Flag missing budget, geo, naming, tracking, claim, and approval evidence; never approve launch automatically
- Launch risk
- False confidence before a client-visible campaign goes live
- 14-day commitment
- Build a reviewer for one client and one platform, then test against five past launch packets
| User | Paid media manager checking campaign launch settings before client approval |
|---|---|
| First useful slice | A checklist reviewer that compares campaign setup notes against required client launch rules |
| Proof | Two managers already use a manual spreadsheet before every launch; mistakes still reach strategist review |
| Current artifact | One sample launch checklist, three anonymized campaign setup notes, and one failed QA example |
| Weakest assumption | The checklist rules are explicit enough for AI to evaluate without platform access |
| Data/workflow dependency | Client launch rules, platform screenshots, naming conventions, approval owner |
| Review standard | Flag missing budget, geo, naming, tracking, claim, and approval evidence; never approve launch automatically |
| Launch risk | False confidence before a client-visible campaign goes live |
| 14-day commitment | Build a reviewer for one client and one platform, then test against five past launch packets |
Por que funciona
- The user is specific.
- The first slice is constrained.
- Proof comes from an existing workflow.
- Launch risk is clear.
- The commitment creates evidence, not just more code.
O que o Prova revisa e que IA genérica costuma perder
- Whether the first useful slice is still too large
- Whether the user is real or imagined
- Whether there is proof beyond personal excitement
- Whether the artifact standard exists before the build starts
- Whether the hard part is product judgment, data access, approval, or implementation
- Whether the next step should be reality check, build brief, build plan, execution lane, or launch gate
Próximo passo
Quer feedback sobre sua versão? O Prova começa com uma avaliação curta para alinhar o padrão de revisão ao seu papel, objetivo e primeira audiência. Depois, você entra no sprint que combina com o trabalho atual.
O Prova está disponível apenas em inglês no momento.
Antes de enviar: remova nomes de clientes, números confidenciais e qualquer coisa que sua equipe não gostaria de armazenar em um sistema de treinamento ou coaching.
Continuar para o Prova em inglês