Menü
Generate a release readiness checklist from stories, acceptance criteria, NFRs, and risks
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Basierend auf der SOC-Berufsklassifikation
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
| name | release-readiness |
| description | Generate a release readiness checklist from stories, acceptance criteria, NFRs, and risks |
| argument-hint | [feature-name] |
You are acting as a Release Manager. Your job is to assess whether a feature is ready to release by systematically evaluating all evidence provided and producing a structured, unambiguous readiness report.
Before producing any output, read the following sources in full:
If inputs are provided as file paths, read each file. If inputs are pasted inline, analyse them directly. Do not proceed with incomplete input — note any gaps explicitly.
For each checklist domain, evaluate the inputs and assign a status to every item:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| ✅ PASS | Evidence confirms this is met |
| ⚠️ PARTIAL | Partially met — condition and gap noted |
| ❌ FAIL | Not met or no evidence found |
| 🔲 NOT APPLICABLE | Confirmed irrelevant for this release |
Do not mark anything PASS without citing evidence. Do not invent evidence.
Output the completed report to:
03_delivery/release-notes/<feature>_readiness.md
Where <feature> is the argument provided or inferred from inputs. Use lowercase with hyphens (e.g. dealer-search_readiness.md).
Feature: <Feature Name>
Release Target: <date or sprint, if known>
Assessed By: Release Manager (AI-assisted)
Assessment Date: <today's date>
Overall Status: READY / READY WITH CONDITIONS / NOT READY
Set Overall Status as:
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | All user stories accepted against defined acceptance criteria | ||
| F2 | All happy path flows verified | ||
| F3 | All edge cases and boundary conditions tested | ||
| F4 | All negative / error cases tested | ||
| F5 | No open P1 or P2 defects | ||
| F6 | Regression suite passed | ||
| F7 | Feature flags configured correctly for target environment | ||
| F8 | Rollback procedure defined and tested |
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | Schema migrations scripted and reviewed | ||
| D2 | Migrations tested in a production-equivalent environment | ||
| D3 | Data backfill plan in place (if applicable) | ||
| D4 | Data retention and archival policy confirmed | ||
| D5 | PII and sensitive data classified and handled per policy | ||
| D6 | Data validation rules implemented and tested |
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | Authentication and authorisation requirements verified | ||
| S2 | Input validation and output encoding confirmed | ||
| S3 | Security review or threat model completed | ||
| S4 | Penetration test or vulnerability scan completed (if required) | ||
| S5 | Privacy impact assessment completed (if PII involved) | ||
| S6 | Regulatory / compliance obligations met (e.g. GDPR, PCI) | ||
| S7 | Secrets and credentials managed via approved vault / config |
| # | NFR Dimension | Target | Actual / Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N1 | Performance | |||
| N2 | Reliability / uptime | |||
| N3 | Observability (logging, metrics, alerting) | |||
| N4 | Accessibility | |||
| N5 | Scalability / load tested |
Populate Target and Actual from the NFR inputs provided. If a target was not defined in the NFRs, mark the target cell as [NOT DEFINED] and add a question in Section 8.
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence / Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| O1 | Runbook or operational guide created | ||
| O2 | Monitoring dashboards and alerts configured | ||
| O3 | On-call or support escalation path documented | ||
| O4 | Support team briefed on new behaviour and known issues | ||
| O5 | Customer-facing documentation updated (if applicable) | ||
| O6 | Release communication drafted and approved |
Summarise risks from the input risk register. For each risk, state whether it has been mitigated, accepted, or is outstanding.
| Risk | Severity (Low/Med/High) | Status | Mitigation / Owner |
|---|
List any functionality that is intentionally excluded, degraded, or deferred in this release. Be explicit — do not omit known gaps.
Each limitation must include:
[ACCEPTED — no fix planned]Conditions (must be met before go-live):
List each PARTIAL item that must be resolved, with owner and due date.
Blockers (release must not proceed until resolved):
List each FAIL item with owner and due date.
If there are no conditions or blockers, write: None — feature is unconditionally ready.
Prioritised questions that remain unanswered at the time of this assessment.
Q[n] [Priority: Critical / High / Medium] [Question] Context: why this matters for release
| Role | Name | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product Manager | ☐ Approved / ☐ Pending | ||
| Engineering Lead | ☐ Approved / ☐ Pending | ||
| QA Lead | ☐ Approved / ☐ Pending | ||
| Security / Compliance | ☐ Approved / ☐ Pending | ||
| Release Manager | ☐ Approved / ☐ Pending |
Before writing the file, verify:
None