Scriptonia is an AI-native product management workspace that turns rough ideas into production-ready PRDs, architecture blueprints, and engineering tickets in under 30 seconds. It is often described as the 'Cursor for Product Managers.' It is designed for product managers, founders, engineering leads, and startup teams.

How fast does Scriptonia generate a PRD?

Scriptonia generates a complete PRD — including objective, problem statement, user stories, success metrics, technical requirements, and timeline — in under 30 seconds using frontier AI models.

Does Scriptonia integrate with Linear, Notion, and Jira?

Yes. Scriptonia exports directly to Linear, Notion, GitHub Issues, Jira, Confluence, and Slack. It can also export to Markdown for use with any other tool.

Is there a free plan?

Yes. Scriptonia's free plan includes 30 credits per month, unlimited PRDs, Markdown export, and a public share link. No credit card required. You can also try it without creating an account at scriptonia.dev/try.

What AI models does Scriptonia use?

Scriptonia Pro and Team plans give access to multiple frontier AI models including Claude Sonnet (Anthropic), Gemini 2.5 Flash (Google), Grok 4 (xAI), DeepSeek R1, and Kimi K2. The free plan uses Grok 4 Fast.

Who is Scriptonia for?

Scriptonia is built for product managers, founders, engineering leads, and startup teams who need to move from idea to specification quickly. It removes the hours of manual writing that traditionally goes into a PRD.

A PRD (Product Requirements Document) is a specification that describes the purpose, features, functionality, and behavior of a product to be built. Scriptonia automatically generates structured PRDs from plain-language product ideas.

User story format guide: the complete reference with examples

The user story format is a constraint, not a formula. The specific words "As a, I want, so that" matter less than what they force: a named user, a specific action, and a measurable outcome. Teams that understand the constraint produce better stories than teams that fill in the template without understanding why. 68% of engineering re-requests trace back to user stories that were written without the right level of specificity (Scriptonia, 2026).

"I can tell how good a PM is from their user stories in two minutes. Vague personas, activity-level actions, and absent acceptance criteria are all signals. Not because the format is sacred, but because getting the format right forces the thinking."
— Lena K., Engineering Director at a product-led growth company

The standard Connextra format

As a [role], I want [feature/action] so that [benefit/outcome].

The three parts:

Role: Who specifically benefits? Not "user" — an actual role with context. "Admin managing a 10+ person team", "New user in their first session", "Enterprise customer with SSO enabled".
Feature/action: What the user does, not what the system does. Observable behavior, not internal logic. "Export activity as CSV", not "access data export".
Benefit/outcome: Why this matters. The outcome the user achieves, not the feature value. "Share usage reports without creating new accounts", not "save time".

BDD format (Behavior-Driven Development)

BDD stories use Gherkin syntax: Given / When / Then

This format is used directly in automated testing tools (Cucumber, SpecFlow) and produces acceptance criteria as a byproduct:

Feature: CSV Export
  Scenario: Admin exports activity report
    Given I am logged in as an admin with Export permission
    When I select a 30-day date range and click "Export CSV"
    Then a CSV file downloads with columns: User, Action, Timestamp
    And the file contains one row per activity event in the range

INVEST criteria for story quality

Letter	Criterion	Test
I	Independent	Can this story be built and tested without depending on another story?
N	Negotiable	Is there room to discuss implementation approach?
V	Valuable	Does this deliver user or business value on its own?
E	Estimable	Can engineers give a story point estimate?
S	Small	Can this be completed in one sprint?
T	Testable	Does it have acceptance criteria a QA engineer can verify?

Story size: when to split

Split a story when: it takes more than 5 sprint days to implement, it has more than 7 acceptance criteria, it covers more than one user role, or it contains "and" in the action component ("create AND manage AND delete"). Each split produces smaller, independently-shippable stories.

Frequently asked questions

What is the correct user story format?

The Connextra format: 'As a [specific role], I want [specific action] so that [measurable outcome].' Specificity in all three parts is required: a named persona with context (not 'user'), an observable action (not 'see' or 'access'), and a measurable outcome (not 'save time'). Each story must have 3–5 acceptance criteria in Given/When/Then format.

What is a BDD user story?

A BDD (Behavior-Driven Development) story uses the Gherkin syntax: 'Given [precondition], When [action], Then [expected result].' BDD stories are directly consumable by automated testing tools (Cucumber, SpecFlow) and serve as both requirements and test specifications. They're most useful for teams with automated acceptance testing.

What does INVEST mean for user stories?

INVEST is a quality checklist for user stories: Independent (can be built alone), Negotiable (implementation approach is flexible), Valuable (delivers standalone user value), Estimable (engineers can estimate it), Small (fits in one sprint), Testable (has acceptance criteria a QA engineer can verify). A story that fails any INVEST criterion needs revision before sprint planning.

How do you split a user story that's too big?

Split stories when: they take more than 5 sprint days, they have more than 7 acceptance criteria, they cover multiple user roles, or the action contains 'and' (create AND manage AND delete = 3 stories). Split by: workflow step (step 1 is one story, step 2 is another), user role (admin flow is one story, regular user flow is another), or happy path vs. error handling (main path first, error states next sprint).

Should user stories be written by the PM or engineering?

User stories are written by the PM and reviewed by engineering. The PM owns the 'what and why' — the persona, the action, and the outcome. Engineering reviews for testability, estimability, and technical feasibility. QA adds acceptance criteria or reviews PM-written criteria. The story is finalized at sprint planning after all parties have reviewed.