project-worth-my-time

name	project-worth-my-time
description	Use after PROJECT_GUIDE.md exists, when the user asks if a project is worth their time, should they build vs buy, or invokes project-worth-my-time. Follow-up to explain-new-project—weighs project context (files, git history, chat) to recommend whether to invest in a repo, cherry-pick a feature, park the idea, pass, or use an existing polished product instead. Optionally enriched by a personal-memory MCP (e.g. Pieces) when one is available.
disable-model-invocation	true

Project Worth My Time

Relationship to other project skills

This skill is a follow-up to explain-new-project. When resuming work after time away, also see project-catch-up for stack updates and new tools/skills.

It assumes you already understand what the project is.

1. If PROJECT_GUIDE.md exists at the project root, read it first (do not re-explore from scratch unless it is stale or missing quick-start sections).
2. If it does not exist, either run the same exploration as explain-new-project or tell the user: Run the explain-new-project skill first for a faster, clearer verdict.

Same audience and language rules as explain-new-project: self-taught, plain language, Learn: lines for jargon, language matches the user's chat.

When invoked

1. Confirm project root.
2. (Optional) Personal context — if a memory MCP (e.g. Pieces) is available, enrich the verdict with the user's recent work (see below). The verdict never depends on it.
3. Read project evidence: PROJECT_GUIDE.md, README, manifest, rough maturity signals (last commit, TODOs, half-built features).
4. Alternatives scan — if the project is a common product type (habit app, landing page, automation, CRM, etc.), search the web for mature tools the user could use instead of building from scratch.
5. Write the verdict using the template below.
6. Always save PROJECT_VERDICT.md at the project root (overwrite if present).
7. In chat: show Quick verdict + What I'd do in full; one line points to the file for reasoning and alternatives.

Optional: personal context (memory MCP)

If you have a personal-memory MCP server (e.g. Pieces, exposed as user-pieces or pieces), you can enrich the verdict with the user's recent work and preferences. This is entirely optional — the verdict stands on project files, git history, and chat alone. If the server is missing or a call fails, say so plainly and move on. Never invent memory.

Step 1 — Persona

get_user_persona()

Use for tone, role, and stated preferences.

Step 2 — LTM queries (run 2–4, adapt wording to this project)

Use ask_pieces_ltm with question, topics, open_files (current workspace paths), and related_questions when helpful.

Query A — current focus

• Question: What projects and apps have I been working on most in the last 2–4 weeks? What am I trying to ship or learn?
• Topics: active projects, goals, current sprint, main repo names if known from path

Query B — tools and workflow

• Question: What tools, stacks, and workflows do I prefer and use repeatedly (editors, frameworks, hosting, AI tools)?
• Topics: stack preferences, editor/agent, Vercel, React, Swift, automation habits

Query C — fit with this project

• Question: Have I worked on something similar to [one-line project summary]? What happened—did I finish, abandon, or pivot?
• Topics: [project name], [domain keywords from PROJECT_GUIDE]

Query D — energy and patterns (optional)

• Question: Do I tend to start many projects and not finish? What kinds of projects did I actually complete recently?
• Topics: unfinished projects, shipped work, motivation

Synthesize these results into a short About you (from your recent work) block in the saved file—no raw dumps.

Alternatives scan (existing products)

When the idea is exciting but building everything is unlikely to beat polished software:

1. Name the job to be done in plain language (not the tech stack).
2. Use web search for 2–3 established options (open-source or commercial) that solve it well.
3. In the verdict, be honest: Your idea can still be worth it for learning or a niche twist—but if you only need [outcome], [Product] may be enough.

Do not dismiss the user's idea; separate learning/building from getting the outcome today.

Verdict types (pick exactly one primary)

Verdict	Meaning
Go deep	Fits your goals, stack, and energy; worth continuing or finishing
Cherry-pick	Take one feature, pattern, or file; do not carry the whole repo
Park it	Good idea, wrong time—save for a future project
Pass	Low payoff vs effort given your context; unlikely to finish or use
Use existing instead	The outcome already exists, polished; building duplicate is optional

You may add a secondary note (e.g. primary Park it, secondary consider Notion template for X).

Report template

Quick verdict first—reader can stop after section 2.

# [Project name] — worth your time?

> **Quick verdict** — read the box and "What I'd do", then stop if you have your answer.
> **The rest** — why, your context, alternatives, and honesty checks.

---

## Quick verdict

**Primary:** [Go deep | Cherry-pick | Park it | Pass | Use existing instead]

**In one sentence:** [Plain-language recommendation]

## What I'd do

[3–5 bullets: concrete next actions—open X, archive repo, try tool Y, steal feature Z, etc.]

---

## The rest (optional)

### Why (matched to you)

[Plain reasoning tied to PROJECT_GUIDE + Pieces context—not generic advice]

### About you (from your recent work)

[If a memory MCP was available, a short synthesis of the user's recent work here; otherwise omit this block]

### Build vs use something that already exists

| Option | Best for | Tradeoff |
|--------|----------|----------|
| Keep building this | ... | ... |
| [Existing tool 1] | ... | ... |
| [Existing tool 2] | ... | ... |

[Only include rows that apply. **Learn:** lines for unfamiliar product names if needed.]

### Honesty check

- **Excitement:** [Does the idea still spark joy?]
- **Reality:** [Half-built? duplicate? misaligned with what you actually use?]
- **Opportunity cost:** [What you might not do if you stay here]

### If you cherry-pick or park

- **Save this idea as:** [one-line note they can paste elsewhere]
- **Worth stealing:** [specific file, pattern, or feature—or "none"]

### If you go deep

- **First milestone (small):** [one achievable win]
- **Stop if:** [signal to pivot or pass]

Tone

• Direct friend, not a productivity guru
• Celebrate excitement; challenge duplicate work gently
• Never shame abandoned projects
• If you can see (from memory context or git history) they already have 3 similar WIPs, say so kindly

What not to do

• Use personal-memory context when available, but never block or delay the verdict waiting on it
• Do not recommend "learn X framework" unless it unblocks their stated goal
• Do not skip the alternatives scan for app-like or SaaS-like projects
• Do not ask whether to save PROJECT_VERDICT.md
• Do not replace PROJECT_GUIDE.md—this is a separate file

Multi-root workspaces

Same rules as explain-new-project: one verdict per named root; save PROJECT_VERDICT.md in that root only.

---

Examples: examples.md