eol-readiness-advisor

name	eol-readiness-advisor
argument-hint	[product or feature under EOL consideration, and what triggered it]
description	Run a go/no-go assessment for retiring a product or feature, then right-size the effort. Use when someone says "we should probably kill this" and nobody has made the call.
intent	Structured go/no-go assessment for sunsetting a product or feature. Determines whether EOL is the right call, how intense the sunset effort needs to be, and which organizational functions need to be involved. Prevents both premature kills and expensive delays on products that should have been retired sooner.
type	interactive
theme	eol-transition
best_for	["Deciding whether a declining product should actually be retired — or held, harvested, or fixed","Right-sizing an EOL effort so a feature deprecation doesn't get a flagship playbook","Naming the obligations and landmines that make a sunset harder than it looks"]
scenarios	["Leadership keeps saying we should kill this module but nobody will make the call — help me assess it","We're retiring a hardware line with service contracts and channel partners; how big does this effort need to be?"]
estimated_time	15-25 min

EOL Readiness Advisor

Purpose

Decide whether a product or feature should actually be retired — and if so, how much machinery the retirement deserves. This skill produces a go/no-go verdict with named evidence, an intensity level you choose, and a short list of the obligations that will bite you if ignored.

Most EOL guidance assumes the decision is already made and jumps to the plan. This skill sits earlier: it is the conversation where "we should probably kill this" becomes a decision someone will defend in a room.

It is equally willing to tell you not to retire. A "hold" or "harvest" verdict is a real outcome here, not a consolation prize.

Input

Works best with: The product or feature under consideration and what triggered the conversation (a declining number, a strategy shift, a support-cost complaint, an exec offhand remark).

Also useful: Revenue and customer counts, whether a replacement exists, contract or regulatory commitments, and any political sensitivities you already know about.

Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.

Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The skill opens by asking what's under review and why, then walks you through blast radius, intensity, and transition path one question at a time. You do not need the numbers in front of you — "I don't know" is a valid answer that becomes a labeled assumption in the verdict.

Example invocations:

• Should we retire our legacy reporting module? Usage is down 60% and support costs are climbing.
• EOL readiness check on our NFA-200 controller line — 120 installs, channel partners, UL certified.

---

Key Concepts

The Right-Sizing Dial

Not all EOLs play out the same. Some are a changelog entry and a support macro. Some consume the whole company for three quarters. Most land in the middle. The single most common EOL failure in either direction is a mismatch between the size of the sunset and the size of the response — a flagship retirement run as a Jira ticket, or a feature deprecation that spawns a steering committee.

So the intensity is a dial you set, not a verdict the framework hands you:

Dimension	Level 1 — Light	Level 2 — Standard	Level 3 — Heavy