View full screenshot ↗The saved wording · verbatim
A rechargeable desk light for indoor use. Battery life, price, and production quantity are still undecided.
Hardware DoulaTest & learn
A worked example · October 21, 2026
Same product.
Two ways to define it.
We put the same fictional desk light through both versions of Hardware Doula. Here is what happened, what changed, and what we still need to learn.
See the comparison Actual screenshots · Same Doula agent
What we learned
Both versions kept the facts and the unknowns. The XRD changes how requirements are organized and connected. This example does not yet show that it produces a better definition.
01
Keep the starting point the same
One brief. Three things left open.
“I am developing a rechargeable desk light for indoor use. Battery life, price, and production quantity are still undecided. Help me define the product without filling those gaps for me. Show a proposed Overview with these facts and unknowns.”
The complete submitted message began with “Fictional XRD comparison check.” Both sites received the same message.
- Ask DoulaThe actual agent proposes an Overview.
- Choose to saveWe explicitly accept the wording.
- Reload & exportThe saved text survives reload; both Word exports succeed.
02
Look at the actual results
Different templates. A very similar first step.
These are captures from the completed October 21 trial, after saving. Open either image to read the full screen.
View full screenshot ↗
View full screenshot ↗The saved wording · verbatim
A rechargeable desk light for indoor use. Battery life, price, and production quantity are undecided.
03
The shared foundation
What stays the same
The same guide
Both use the Hardware Doula agent and the same conversation interface. This compares templates, not two different assistants.
Room for unknowns
In this example, neither version filled in battery life, price, or quantity. An unfinished decision remained unfinished.
You choose what is saved
Both proposed wording before acceptance. The accepted Overview survived reload, and both produced a Word document.
04
Where the templates diverge
The bigger change comes after the Overview.
The first saved paragraph looks similar because the Overview is shared. The source templates reveal more substantial differences further into the work.
Overall structure
A · Current PRD25 topics in the September PRD.
B · XRD trial23 topics in the October XRD, with a dedicated Engineering section.
What this could meanFewer topics does not mean less work. The grouping and detail change.
Tracing a requirement
A · Current PRDFeature and application tables without the XRD’s ID and Lineage columns.
B · XRD trialAdds requirement IDs and Lineage fields—a place to connect a requirement to its origin or related requirement.
What this could meanPotentially easier to follow why a requirement exists. That benefit still needs a real-project review.
Engineering detail
A · Current PRDTechnical, miscellaneous, and environmental tables in the earlier structure.
B · XRD trialSeparate environmental, hardware, and software tables, with specifications and requirement references.
What this could meanMore explicit places for engineering detail; deciding where a requirement belongs may take more guidance.
Existing project notes
A · Current PRDIncludes current-design and product-inspiration headings.
B · XRD trialThose headings and some earlier tables have no direct counterpart.
What this could meanMoving a real project needs a human review. Earlier notes must be preserved, not silently discarded.
These structural differences come from the September 21 and October 19 source templates. The possible benefits are interpretations to test, not measured improvements.
Our recommendation
Try one real project before choosing.
The basic save-and-export path works in both. Next, compare whether the XRD makes Brogan’s actual project clearer, easier to review, and less work to correct.
ClarityDo the questions and topic groups make sense?
Useful detailDo requirement references help, or add work?
FaithfulnessDo corrections, sources, and unknowns stay intact?
Sign-in required for the trials. Each keeps its own conversations and saved work. Brogan’s usability and engineering review are still pending.
What this demonstration does—and does not—establish
One matched fictional example demonstrates the Overview, explicit acceptance, reload, and export. It is not a complete engineering review or a controlled measure of quality, time saved, or ease of use. Agent wording and sketches can vary.
A separate XRD upload test exercised requirement rows and corrections. It was not a matched comparison, so it is not used here to rank the versions. One source-discussion reply gave an unverified line location for a real passage; source-location accuracy remains open.
Screenshots were captured on October 21, 2026 from application release 26c74f7, before the custom domain names were added. The original captures are preserved; their viewport widths differ slightly. They contain a fictional project and no client documents. The later domain release verified a real Doula reply on each new address.