Specs
The best PRD template is the one you'll actually keep current
People ask for the best template, the easiest way to start, an open-source repo of real PRDs. Reasonable questions — aimed at the part that was never the problem.
A cluster of threads all circle the same hope: what's the best PRD template, what's the easiest way to create a useful PRD or FSD, is there an open-source repo of real PRDs to copy, what are the different ways people structure them. The instinct is that if you find the right template, good specs follow.
They don't. The template is the easiest part of a PRD and the least related to whether it's any good. You can fill a perfect template with fiction, and you can write a great spec in a plain doc. The hunt for the perfect template is a hunt in the wrong place — but since people keep asking, here's the honest version.
What a template should contain (it's not complicated)
- Problem and why now — grounded in real evidence, not "users want this."
- Goals and non-goals — what success is, and explicitly what's out of scope.
- Users and context — specific people, not "a user who wants to get started."
- Requirements — including boundary behavior, each traceable to a reason.
- Acceptance criteria — happy and unhappy paths.
- Success metrics — the number your team actually tracks.
- Open questions — honest about what you don't know yet.
That's it. Every "best template" is a rearrangement of these. The arrangement barely matters.
Why the template hunt disappoints
People asking for an open-source repo of real PRDs are really asking "what does good look like," and a repo of templates won't answer it — because the thing that makes those PRDs good isn't visible in the structure. It's that someone grounded each section in real evidence and refused to fabricate. Copy the structure and you get the container without the contents. You'll have a beautifully organized document about a user who doesn't exist.
The two things that actually matter
- Grounding. Every section tied to something real — a transcript, a ticket, the product itself. This is the whole difference between a good PRD and slop, and no template provides it.
- Staying current. The best template in the world is worthless if the doc goes stale the moment a decision changes. A living spec that updates in place beats a perfect template that's three decisions out of date.
So the best template is genuinely the one you'll keep grounded and current — which is less about the columns and headings than anyone hunting for templates wants to hear.
- Templates are the easy part and barely affect whether a PRD is good.
- A repo of templates won't show you 'what good looks like' — the quality is in the grounding.
- Every section traces to real evidence: transcript, ticket, or the product itself.
- The best template is the one you'll actually keep current as decisions change.
Skip the template hunt in Cadenly
Cadenly structures the spec for you and puts the effort where it counts — grounding each section in real evidence and keeping it current as decisions change.
Start free →