القائمة
Use when planned work must be challenged for delivery, dependency, migration, security, or operational risk before the team commits to scope or sequence.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Use when a bug, failing test, regression, or unexpected behavior needs a root-cause-first debugging loop before code changes, especially when brownfield seams, recent releases, or historical defect matches make guesswork unsafe.
Use when E2E tests must go beyond shallow happy-path checks — multi-step user journeys, stateful sessions, cross-boundary state consistency, failure-mode edges — or when the suite passes but production still breaks. Platform- and framework-agnostic (web, mobile, desktop; Playwright, XCUITest, Cypress).
Use when discovery has narrowed an idea enough that the team must make a go/no-go, pivot, or scope-down decision based on technical, economic, operational, or timeline viability before requirements, architecture, or major implementation.
The mandatory gateway for all new engineering work. Triage and route new products, apps, features, migrations, tech-debt, or any 'not sure where to start' request to the correct lifecycle path. Use before starting design or implementation. Do not use for ongoing tasks, specific debugging, or PR reviews.
Use when discovery needs evidence about market demand, competitors, pricing pressure, or underserved segments for a new product or expansion idea before feasibility, user research, or requirements are finalized.
Use when intake has identified the likely lifecycle path but the problem statement, solution direction, or key trade-offs are still too fuzzy for requirements, research, or architecture work to start cleanly
| name | pc-risk-assessment |
| description | Use when planned work must be challenged for delivery, dependency, migration, security, or operational risk before the team commits to scope or sequence. |
| metadata | {"phase":"03-planning","inputs":["task-list","dependency-graph","architecture-doc"],"outputs":["risk-register"],"prerequisites":["pc-task-breakdown"],"quality_gate":"Material delivery risks are identified, prioritized, and paired with concrete mitigation or sequencing decisions","roles":["tech-lead","architect","devops-engineer"],"methodologies":["all"],"effort":"medium"} |
Make delivery risk visible before it becomes schedule surprise or production pain.
Risk assessment identifies what could derail the plan and what the team will do about it.
See context and anti-pattern notes.
I/O contract notes define required inputs and authority.
Scan for risks in at least these buckets:
For each material risk, record:
Do not clutter the register with trivialities. Focus on risks that could change sequence, scope, or release posture.
A risk register is only useful if it changes something. For each high or medium risk, decide whether to:
Make the register concrete enough that estimation, sprint planning, and later retrospectives can reuse it. If a risk is accepted, that acceptance should be explicit.
Produce only declared outputs at their documented quality boundary.
