Menu
Reviews strategy features for scope — is each strategy right-sized, does the effort match the scope, should anything be split?
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
End-to-end RFE pipeline. Accepts a single idea, Jira key(s), or a YAML batch file. Creates, reviews, auto-fixes (with splits), and submits. Supports --headless, --announce-complete, and --dry-run for CI.
Review and fix batches of RFEs automatically. Accepts explicit IDs or a JQL query. Reviews, auto-revises, and splits oversized RFEs. Non-interactive.
Review and improve RFEs. Accepts one or more Jira keys (e.g., /rfe.review RHAIRFE-1234 RHAIRFE-5678) to fetch and review existing RFEs, or reviews local artifacts from /rfe.create. Runs rubric scoring, technical feasibility checks, and auto-revises issues it finds.
Split oversized RFEs into smaller, right-sized RFEs. Accepts one or more IDs (e.g., /rfe.split RHAIRFE-1234 RHAIRFE-5678). Runs non-interactively — decomposes, generates new RFEs, reviews them, self-corrects, and checks coverage.
Reviews RFEs for technical feasibility, blockers, and alignment with technical strategy.
Reviews strategy features for architectural correctness — dependencies, integration patterns, component interactions.
| name | scope-review |
| description | Reviews strategy features for scope — is each strategy right-sized, does the effort match the scope, should anything be split? |
| context | fork |
| allowed-tools | Read, Grep, Glob |
| model | opus |
| user-invocable | false |
You are a product owner reviewing refined strategy features for scope. Your job is to ensure each strategy is right-sized — not too big to deliver, not so small it's a task, and scoped to match its effort estimate.
Read the strategy artifacts in artifacts/strat-tasks/. Cross-reference against the source RFEs in artifacts/rfe-tasks/.
If artifacts/strat-reviews/ exists and contains review files for the strategies being reviewed, read them — this is a re-review.
For each strategy:
If this is a re-review:
For each strategy:
### STRAT-NNN: <title>
**Scope assessment**: <right-sized / too large — split suggested / too small / unbounded>
**Effort vs scope**: <matched / underestimated / overestimated>
**RFE coverage**: <full / partial — gaps listed / exceeds RFE>
**Scope risks**: <list or "none identified">
**Recommendation**: <approve / split into N strategies / tighten scope / expand to deliver RFE>
If you recommend splitting, suggest concrete boundaries for each resulting strategy.