Product Manager - Core Design Experience
for section headings. Use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose.
We need to preserve all substantive info.
Let's extract sections:
- About the role: description after "About The Role". Paragraph(s). We'll put in
.
- Responsibilities: The role description includes responsibilities: own core design and generation experience, get skeptical designer to magic moment, define good output, build evaluation habits, design for trust, hold both sides of enterprise equation, run tight discovery, turn insights into shipped launches fast. Could be a list.
- Requirements/Qualifications/Skills: "Who You Are" bullet points: extremely high ownership, you have an eye, systems thinker, first-principles thinker, fluent in probabilistic systems, resilient and creative under constraints, AI-native, data-driven, 3–5 years product experience, bonus: direct experience shipping generative-AI or ML-powered products; background in fashion/design/creative tools; experience with enterprise/B2B products where buyer and everyday user differ.
We could combine into Requirements (or Qualifications) and Skills. Probably "Requirements" for must-haves, "Skills" for nice-to-haves? But we can just have one section "Requirements" with list.
- Benefits: "What we offer" includes: Innovative culture, Growth paths, Learning & development (annual discretionary stipend), Annual company offsite, Small team high ownership, Competitive salary and equity options, Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance.
We need to include Benefits section only if real specific content. Yes.
Pay: Not explicitly stated salary amount, just "Competitive salary and equity options". That's vague but still mentions salary. The rule: never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. It does state "Competitive salary and equity options". That's enough for Pay? It says salary but not number. Might be considered stating salary (competitive). I'd include Pay section with that line.
Schedule: Not mentioned (full-time). It says Full-Time in job title line but we shouldn't repeat job title as heading. The posting says "New York Full-Time". That indicates schedule: Full-Time. Should we include Schedule section? The rule: only if posting actually states them. It does state Full-Time. So we can include Schedule with "Full-Time". However we need to avoid filler like "not specified". It's specified.
Thus sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Benefits, Pay, Schedule.
We need to ensure we don't create sections with filler. All have content.
Now format:
About the role
... paragraph ...
Responsibilities
- Own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director.
- Get a skeptical, non-technical fashion designer to a genuine “this is magic” moment in their very first session, and repeat that success.
- Define what “good output” means for users and build evaluation habits to know whether the product is actually getting better.
- Design for trust so non‑technical users know when to lean on the model and variability feels graceful instead of broken.
- Hold both sides of the enterprise equation — the everyday creative and the director who signs the contract — when their needs pull apart.
- Run tight discovery — user interviews, competitive teardowns, heavy dogfooding — and turn insights into shipped launches fast.
Requirements
- Extremely high ownership: figure out what needs to happen, unblock yourself, and get it done despite thin resources, missing data, or hostile stakeholders.
- Strong aesthetic eye: able to evaluate generated design concepts and articulate why some are off and one is sellable.
- Systems thinker: see the whole ecosystem a feature touches and flag assumptions about ownership.
- First‑principles thinker: reason from the job‑to‑be‑done and the nature of the medium, willing to discard standard AI‑product patterns when they don’t serve users.
- Fluent in—or quick to learn—probabilistic systems: think in distributions and evaluations, not single specs.
- Resilient and creative under real constraints typical of an early‑stage startup.
- AI‑native in how you work: comfortable using ChatGPT, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Town, or similar AI prototyping and productivity tools.
- Data‑driven: define clear product metrics, use quantitative and qualitative evidence, and are comfortable with tools like Amplitude.
- 3–5 years of product experience, having shipped meaningful products end to end with measurable outcomes.
Optionally we could separate Skills for bonus items, but we can include them in Requirements as bonus bullet.
Add bonus bullets:
- Bonus: direct experience shipping generative‑AI or ML‑powered products.
- Bonus: background in or genuine curiosity about fashion, design, or creative tools.
- Bonus: experience with enterprise/B2B products where the buyer and the everyday user are different people.
Now Benefits:
Benefits
- Innovative culture: own the core of the product at a company where the core is the company, building in one of the most exciting and least‑solved corners of applied AI.
- Growth paths: opportunities to drive impact well beyond your immediate role as the company scales.
- Learning & development: annual discretionary stipend for professional development.
- Annual company offsite that brings the whole team together.
- Small team, high ownership, extremely short distance from your decisions to their impact.
- Competitive salary and equity options.
- Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance.
Pay:
Pay
Competitive salary and equity options.
Schedule:
Schedule
Full‑time.
Make sure no extra sections. Output only HTML fragment.
Check for any repeated content: we have "Competitive salary and equity options" appears both in Benefits and Pay. That's okay but could be considered duplication. Might be better to keep only in Pay and not duplicate in Benefits. However Benefits includes "Competitive salary and equity options" as a bullet; we could remove that bullet from Benefits to avoid duplication. But the instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. If we remove that bullet, we lose that piece of info from Benefits section. However we still have it in Pay section, so the info is preserved overall. The rule about duplication: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." Duplicated lines should be removed. So we should avoid duplicating the same line. So we should keep the compensation info only once, perhaps in Pay section, and not repeat in Benefits. Let's adjust Benefits bullet list to exclude that line.
Thus Benefits bullets:
- Innovative culture...
- Growth paths...
- Learning & development...
- Annual company offsite...
- Small team, high ownership...
- Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance.
Now Pay section: "Competitive salary and equity options."
Schedule: "Full‑time."
Now ensure we didn't miss any substantive info: The "About The Role" paragraph includes: "You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it. We're looking for someone who goes deep on that core and can flex outward when the company needs it — not a generalist who floats across everything at the surface. Your north star in the first months: get a skeptical, non-technical fashion designer to a genuine "this is magic" moment in their very first session, and then again and again. Generative products aren't like normal software. You're not writing a spec for one exact output — you're designing for a range of outputs you don't fully control, for users who shouldn't have to understand what's happening under the hood. You'll own the core generation and design workflow end to end, obsessing over activation and turning a doubtful creative into a believer in their first session. You'll define what "good output" means for our users and build the evaluation habits to know whether the product is actually getting better, design for trust so non-technical users know when to lean on the model and variability feels graceful instead of broken, and hold both sides of the enterprise equation — the everyday creative and the director who signs the contract — when their needs pull apart. You'll run tight discovery — user interviews, competitive teardowns, heavy dogfooding, often all in the same week — and turn those insights into shipped launches fast."
We turned many of those into responsibilities list. The About the role paragraph should be a short prose summarizing the role, not repeating the list. We can keep a concise paragraph: maybe first two sentences: "You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it." Then we can add a sentence about looking for deep ownership vs generalist. But we already have that in responsibilities? Might be okay to keep a short paragraph.
Let's craft About the role paragraph:
You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it. We're looking for someone who goes deep on that core and can flex outward when the company needs it — not a generalist who floats across everything at the surface.
That captures substance.
Now responsibilities list we already have.
Now ensure we didn't miss any responsibility like "define what good output means..." etc. Already in list.
Now ensure we didn't miss any requirement like "AI-native in how you work. Comfortable using ChatGPT, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Town, or other AI prototyping and productivity tools to accelerate research, prototyping, and execution." Already included.
Now ensure we didn't miss "Data-driven. You define clear product metrics, use quantitative and qualitative evidence to make decisions, and are comfortable in Amplitude." Included.
Now ensure we didn't miss "3–5 years of product experience, having shipped meaningful products end to end with measurable outcomes" included.
Now ensure we didn't miss bonus items: we added.
Now ensure we didn't miss "We're serious about hiring for trajectory over pedigree. If you don't check every box but you're clearly wired for this, apply anyway." That's more of a encouragement; could be included in Requirements as a note? It's substantive but not a requirement. Could be added as a paragraph after Requirements list. But it's not a heading; we could add a after Requirements list. However the instruction: Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. Could add a note as a paragraph under Requirements. Let's add a
after the Requirements list:
We’re serious about hiring for trajectory over pedigree — if you don’t check every box but
for prose. We need to preserve all substantive info. Let's extract sections: - About the role: description after "About The Role". Paragraph(s). We'll put in
. - Responsibilities: The role description includes responsibilities: own core design and generation experience, get skeptical designer to magic moment, define good output, build evaluation habits, design for trust, hold both sides of enterprise equation, run tight discovery, turn insights into shipped launches fast. Could be a list. - Requirements/Qualifications/Skills: "Who You Are" bullet points: extremely high ownership, you have an eye, systems thinker, first-principles thinker, fluent in probabilistic systems, resilient and creative under constraints, AI-native, data-driven, 3–5 years product experience, bonus: direct experience shipping generative-AI or ML-powered products; background in fashion/design/creative tools; experience with enterprise/B2B products where buyer and everyday user differ. We could combine into Requirements (or Qualifications) and Skills. Probably "Requirements" for must-haves, "Skills" for nice-to-haves? But we can just have one section "Requirements" with list. - Benefits: "What we offer" includes: Innovative culture, Growth paths, Learning & development (annual discretionary stipend), Annual company offsite, Small team high ownership, Competitive salary and equity options, Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance. We need to include Benefits section only if real specific content. Yes. Pay: Not explicitly stated salary amount, just "Competitive salary and equity options". That's vague but still mentions salary. The rule: never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. It does state "Competitive salary and equity options". That's enough for Pay? It says salary but not number. Might be considered stating salary (competitive). I'd include Pay section with that line. Schedule: Not mentioned (full-time). It says Full-Time in job title line but we shouldn't repeat job title as heading. The posting says "New York Full-Time". That indicates schedule: Full-Time. Should we include Schedule section? The rule: only if posting actually states them. It does state Full-Time. So we can include Schedule with "Full-Time". However we need to avoid filler like "not specified". It's specified. Thus sections: About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. We need to ensure we don't create sections with filler. All have content. Now format:
About the role
... paragraph ...
Responsibilities
- Own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director.
- Get a skeptical, non-technical fashion designer to a genuine “this is magic” moment in their very first session, and repeat that success.
- Define what “good output” means for users and build evaluation habits to know whether the product is actually getting better.
- Design for trust so non‑technical users know when to lean on the model and variability feels graceful instead of broken.
- Hold both sides of the enterprise equation — the everyday creative and the director who signs the contract — when their needs pull apart.
- Run tight discovery — user interviews, competitive teardowns, heavy dogfooding — and turn insights into shipped launches fast.
Requirements
- Extremely high ownership: figure out what needs to happen, unblock yourself, and get it done despite thin resources, missing data, or hostile stakeholders.
- Strong aesthetic eye: able to evaluate generated design concepts and articulate why some are off and one is sellable.
- Systems thinker: see the whole ecosystem a feature touches and flag assumptions about ownership.
- First‑principles thinker: reason from the job‑to‑be‑done and the nature of the medium, willing to discard standard AI‑product patterns when they don’t serve users.
- Fluent in—or quick to learn—probabilistic systems: think in distributions and evaluations, not single specs.
- Resilient and creative under real constraints typical of an early‑stage startup.
- AI‑native in how you work: comfortable using ChatGPT, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Town, or similar AI prototyping and productivity tools.
- Data‑driven: define clear product metrics, use quantitative and qualitative evidence, and are comfortable with tools like Amplitude.
- 3–5 years of product experience, having shipped meaningful products end to end with measurable outcomes.
Benefits
- Innovative culture: own the core of the product at a company where the core is the company, building in one of the most exciting and least‑solved corners of applied AI.
- Growth paths: opportunities to drive impact well beyond your immediate role as the company scales.
- Learning & development: annual discretionary stipend for professional development.
- Annual company offsite that brings the whole team together.
- Small team, high ownership, extremely short distance from your decisions to their impact.
- Competitive salary and equity options.
- Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance.
Pay
Competitive salary and equity options.
Schedule:Schedule
Full‑time.
Make sure no extra sections. Output only HTML fragment. Check for any repeated content: we have "Competitive salary and equity options" appears both in Benefits and Pay. That's okay but could be considered duplication. Might be better to keep only in Pay and not duplicate in Benefits. However Benefits includes "Competitive salary and equity options" as a bullet; we could remove that bullet from Benefits to avoid duplication. But the instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. If we remove that bullet, we lose that piece of info from Benefits section. However we still have it in Pay section, so the info is preserved overall. The rule about duplication: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." Duplicated lines should be removed. So we should avoid duplicating the same line. So we should keep the compensation info only once, perhaps in Pay section, and not repeat in Benefits. Let's adjust Benefits bullet list to exclude that line. Thus Benefits bullets: - Innovative culture... - Growth paths... - Learning & development... - Annual company offsite... - Small team, high ownership... - Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and vision insurance. Now Pay section: "Competitive salary and equity options." Schedule: "Full‑time." Now ensure we didn't miss any substantive info: The "About The Role" paragraph includes: "You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it. We're looking for someone who goes deep on that core and can flex outward when the company needs it — not a generalist who floats across everything at the surface. Your north star in the first months: get a skeptical, non-technical fashion designer to a genuine "this is magic" moment in their very first session, and then again and again. Generative products aren't like normal software. You're not writing a spec for one exact output — you're designing for a range of outputs you don't fully control, for users who shouldn't have to understand what's happening under the hood. You'll own the core generation and design workflow end to end, obsessing over activation and turning a doubtful creative into a believer in their first session. You'll define what "good output" means for our users and build the evaluation habits to know whether the product is actually getting better, design for trust so non-technical users know when to lean on the model and variability feels graceful instead of broken, and hold both sides of the enterprise equation — the everyday creative and the director who signs the contract — when their needs pull apart. You'll run tight discovery — user interviews, competitive teardowns, heavy dogfooding, often all in the same week — and turn those insights into shipped launches fast." We turned many of those into responsibilities list. The About the role paragraph should be a short prose summarizing the role, not repeating the list. We can keep a concise paragraph: maybe first two sentences: "You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it." Then we can add a sentence about looking for deep ownership vs generalist. But we already have that in responsibilities? Might be okay to keep a short paragraph. Let's craft About the role paragraph:You'll own the core design and generation experience — the heart of the product, where a designer goes from an idea to something they'd actually put in front of their director. This is the wedge the whole company is built on, and you'll have ownership over it. We're looking for someone who goes deep on that core and can flex outward when the company needs it — not a generalist who floats across everything at the surface.
That captures substance. Now responsibilities list we already have. Now ensure we didn't miss any responsibility like "define what good output means..." etc. Already in list. Now ensure we didn't miss any requirement like "AI-native in how you work. Comfortable using ChatGPT, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Town, or other AI prototyping and productivity tools to accelerate research, prototyping, and execution." Already included. Now ensure we didn't miss "Data-driven. You define clear product metrics, use quantitative and qualitative evidence to make decisions, and are comfortable in Amplitude." Included. Now ensure we didn't miss "3–5 years of product experience, having shipped meaningful products end to end with measurable outcomes" included. Now ensure we didn't miss bonus items: we added. Now ensure we didn't miss "We're serious about hiring for trajectory over pedigree. If you don't check every box but you're clearly wired for this, apply anyway." That's more of a encouragement; could be included in Requirements as a note? It's substantive but not a requirement. Could be added as a paragraph after Requirements list. But it's not a heading; we could add aafter Requirements list. However the instruction: Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. Could add a note as a paragraph under Requirements. Let's add a
after the Requirements list:
We’re serious about hiring for trajectory over pedigree — if you don’t check every box but