Used WorkBuddy to turn prototype requirements into a runnable input table

Recently, I've been reflecting on whether I talk too much, but I have to say this. In review meetings, Product says, "This requirement is simple, just make a clickable prototype," Dev says, "Give me the fields first," Design asks, "What about interaction states?" Three hours pass, and nothing is decided. I came across a roundup of AI prototyping tools saying that many designers now use AI for design weekly, and PMs are starting to bypass scheduling. I agree with the direction, but after trying it myself, the real bottleneck isn't generation—it's that the materials you feed the AI are too messy.

Listen to me: organize requirements into fixed inputs first, then hand them to the prototyping tool. I ran WorkBuddy's automated weekly reports for four weeks, just connected WeCom Docs today, and started using Tencent Meeting transcriptions a few days ago. Along the way, I built a prototype requirement aggregator. WorkBuddy is an AI office efficiency tool that handles documents, spreadsheets, emails, PPTs, data analysis, and file organization. Here, I mainly use it for file organization and spreadsheet generation.

Let me detail the specific path. Open WorkBuddy, click "Space" on the homepage, then "New Space," select the "Blank" template, and name it "Prototype Requirement Pool." Enter the space, click "Table," and create a new sheet. Don't add too many fields; I stick to seven: Role, Entry Point, Page, Action, State, Exception, Acceptance Criteria. Role is who the user is, Entry Point is where they come from, Page is the hierarchy, Action is what happens when clicked, State covers empty/loading/success/failure, Exception covers network loss/no permission/data missing, and Acceptance Criteria is how Dev judges completion. This table isn't for human appreciation; it's food for the AI. The more stable the column names, the better.

Then click "Data Source" and connect WeCom Docs and Tencent Meeting transcriptions. I just started using WeCom Docs today and am still testing it; Tencent Meeting transcription started being used on August 31st, so it's also new. The benefit is that phrases like "I think it should be like this here" from meetings can be searched. After authorization, you'll see "Connected" and "Pending Sync" in the data source list. Select a fixed folder, e.g., "Review Materials." Don't let it scan the whole company, or old versions will drown you. Once data sources are in, click "Field Mapping." Simply put, tell the AI which column corresponds to which. I map actions from transcriptions to "Action," pages from PRDs to "Page," and pending confirmation items from meetings to "Exception." PRD stands for Product Requirements Document. Don't be lazy here; initially, I let it auto-guess, and it missed exceptions. Later, I manually bound them, and stability improved significantly. Don't let it freely guess fields; this is where WorkBuddy fails most easily.

After mapping, click "Task" and create a new "Generate Requirement Package." For output format, I choose "Table + Markdown." Markdown is plain text markup, easy to paste into prototyping tools. I wrote a long prompt for it; prompts are instructions for the AI. I only started using Prompts a few days ago. Short instructions let it improvise, resulting in something that looks okay but lacks logical depth. So, I require it to extract only from fixed data sources, not supplement business assumptions, mark missing fields in red, and finally list questions needing confirmation. For example, if Acceptance Criteria is empty, it cannot fabricate one; it must write "Please confirm acceptance criteria."

I also divided permissions. PMs can modify field mappings and task templates; Devs have read-only access to the requirement table but can comment; QA is responsible for maintaining Exceptions and Acceptance Criteria. In WeCom Docs, I set up "Commentable, Non-editable" review drafts, and WorkBuddy spaces sync source document permissions. This prevents everyone from casually changing descriptions, causing the AI to generate a new version while Devs curse at the old table. I've been cursed by Devs for five years and am immune, but avoiding one more instance is always good. For daily maintenance, I run an incremental sync every Monday—only processing new and changed parts, not full re-runs. On Fridays, I check for empty fields; if there are more than three empty fields, it doesn't go into review.

The effect is quite practical. Before, I spent about an afternoon piecing together PRDs, meeting notes, and competitor screenshots before reviews. Now, WorkBuddy produces a draft requirement package in about twenty minutes. I still have to manually review it, especially Exceptions and Acceptance Criteria, as it tends to mix up "No Data" and "API Failure." But it saves time on finding materials and aligning fields. I tested an old requirement by throwing the package into a prototyping tool to generate a Demo. Rework decreased, and Devs at least stopped asking in the group chat, "So how many states are there exactly?"

I feel that prototyping tools are the backend; WorkBuddy is more like the frontend plumbing. If the plumbing isn't fixed, no matter how fast the backend is, it will spray everywhere. My environment might not suit everyone, but the advice is clear: don't rush to chase new prototyping tools. Use WorkBuddy to build a fixed requirement table, lock down Role, Page, Action, State, Exception, and Acceptance Criteria, and then let the AI generate.