Skip to main content Inicio Creadores tuyv ccpm feature-investment-advisor
feature-investment-advisor Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment.
Ir a la instalación Skills Marketplace Descubre y explora habilidades de IA creadas por la comunidad.
Ocupaciones relacionadas SOC
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Mostrar detalles del prompt Un comando directo omite el prompt de revisión. Revisa el origen antes de ejecutarlo.
npx skills add https://github.com/TuYv/ccpm --skill feature-investment-advisorEl comando permanece en una sola línea. Desplázate horizontalmente para revisarlo antes de copiarlo.
¿Prefieres una copia local? Descarga los archivos que SkillsMP tiene disponibles ahora.
Descargar Zip Descargando... Explorador de archivos
2 archivos Más de este repositorio Use when auditing a paid ad account for incremental contribution, wasted spend, or measurement integrity before scaling; runs a typed 20-item ROAS profile with verified vetoes and a SHIP/FIX/BLOCK/UNDECIDED gate on own exported data. Not for campaign structure design — use campaign-architect; not for creative production — use ad-creative-builder. 付费广告账户审计/ROAS评分
Use when the user asks to "write ad copy", "generate RSA headlines", or "build ad creative at volume"; produces ad units — RSA headlines/descriptions, hooks, and an angle matrix — message-matched to the destination landing page. Not for scoring an ad account — use ad-account-auditor; not for the post-click page — use landing-optimizer; not for organic articles — use content-writer. 广告创意/广告文案/RSA标题
Use when the user asks to "design an A/B test", "set up a creative/landing test", "run an incrementality test", or "is this result statistically and practically material?"; produces a hypothesis, variant matrix, sample-size/duration/power plan, and a documented effect/uncertainty read from own exported results. It applies only a precommitted owner-approved action rule; the statistical helper never chooses a business action. Not for producing variants — use ad-creative-builder; not for reading back one shipped change — use paid-measurement-loop. 广告AB测试设计/实验设计/显著性判定/增效测试
name feature-investment-advisor argument-hint [feature to evaluate] description Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment. intent Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math. type interactive best_for ["Assessing whether a feature should be built now","Comparing ROI and strategic value of feature ideas","Pressure-testing roadmap requests with financial logic"] scenarios ["Should we build SSO for mid-market customers this quarter?","Evaluate whether an AI assistant feature is worth the investment","Help me decide if this roadmap request has enough ROI to build"] theme finance-metrics estimated_time 15-25 min
Purpose
Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math.
This is not a generic prioritization framework—it's a financial lens for feature decisions that complements other prioritization methods (RICE, value vs. effort, user research). Use when financial impact is a key decision factor.
Input
Works best with: The feature you're deciding on, in a sentence or two.
Also useful: Revenue connection (direct or indirect), rough cost inputs (dev time, COGS, ongoing OpEx), and the strategic argument being made for it.
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 advisor opens by asking what the feature is and how it's supposed to make or save money.
Example invocation: Should we build SSO/SAML? Enterprise deals keep stalling on it; est. 2 engineer-months plus ongoing support burden.
Key Concepts
The Feature Investment Framework
A systematic approach to evaluate features financially:
Revenue Connection — How does this feature impact revenue?
Direct monetization (new tier, add-on, usage charges)
Indirect monetization (retention, conversion, expansion enablement)
Cost Structure — What does it cost to build and run?
Development cost (one-time investment)
COGS impact (ongoing infrastructure, processing)
OpEx impact (ongoing support, maintenance)
ROI Calculation — Is the return worth the investment?
Direct monetization: Revenue impact / Development cost
Retention features: LTV impact across customer base / Development cost
Factor in gross margin, not just revenue
Strategic Value — Non-financial value that might override pure ROI
Competitive moat (prevents churn to competitor)
Platform enabler (unlocks future features)
Market positioning (needed for enterprise deals)
Risk reduction (compliance, security)
Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)
Not feature scoring alone: Combines financial analysis with strategic judgmentNot revenue-only thinking: Considers margins, costs, and ROI, not just top-line revenueNot ignoring retention: Indirect revenue impact (churn reduction) is equally validNot building without validation: Assumes you've done discovery; this is the financial lens
When to Use This Framework
Prioritizing between features with quantifiable revenue/retention impact
Evaluating expensive features (>1 engineer-month of work)
Making build/buy/partner decisions
Defending feature prioritization to stakeholders or leadership
Choosing between direct monetization (add-on) vs. indirect (retention)
Feature is table stakes (must-have for competitive parity)
Impact is purely qualitative (brand, UX delight without measurable retention effect)
You haven't validated the problem (do discovery first)
Feature is < 1 week of work (just build it)
Facilitation Source of Truth
session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
one-question turns with plain-language prompts
progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
numbered recommendations at decision points
quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include Other (specify) when useful)
This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
Application This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions , offering 3-5 enumerated options at decision points.
Step 0: Gather Context "Let's evaluate the financial impact of this feature investment. Please provide:
What's the feature? (1-2 sentences)
Target customer segment (SMB, mid-market, enterprise, all)
Current business context:
Current MRR/ARR (or customer count if pre-revenue)
Current ARPU/ARPA
Current monthly churn rate
Gross margin %
Development cost estimate (team size × time)
Any ongoing COGS or OpEx implications?
You can provide estimates if you don't have exact numbers."
Step 1: Identify Revenue Connection "How does this feature impact revenue? Choose the option that best describes the revenue connection:
Direct monetization (new revenue stream) — We'll charge for this (new pricing tier, paid add-on, usage-based fee)Retention improvement (reduce churn) — Addresses key churn reason; keeps customers from leavingConversion improvement (trial-to-paid) — Helps convert free/trial users to paid customersExpansion enabler (upsell/cross-sell) — Creates upsell path or drives usage-based expansionNo direct revenue impact — Table stakes, platform improvement, or strategic value only Choose a number, or describe a custom revenue connection."
Based on selection, agent adapts:
If 1 (Direct monetization):
"What pricing are you considering?"
"What % of customers do you expect to adopt this?" (conservative, base, optimistic)
Calculate: Potential Monthly Revenue = Customer Base × Adoption Rate × Price
If 2 (Retention improvement):
"What % of churn does this feature address?" (e.g., "30% of churned customers cited this gap")
"What churn reduction do you expect?" (e.g., "5% → 4% monthly churn")
Calculate: LTV Impact = Increase in Customer Lifetime × Customer Base × ARPU × Margin
If 3 (Conversion improvement):
"Current trial-to-paid conversion rate?"
"Expected conversion lift?" (e.g., "20% → 25% conversion")
Calculate: Additional MRR = Trial Users × Conversion Lift × ARPU
If 4 (Expansion enabler):
"What expansion opportunity does this create?" (upsell tier, usage growth, add-on)
"What % of customers will expand?"
Calculate: Expansion MRR = Customer Base × Expansion Rate × ARPU Increase
If 5 (No direct revenue impact):
Skip to strategic value assessment
Step 2: Assess Cost Structure "What's the cost structure for this feature?
Development cost (one-time):
Team size: ___ engineers
Time estimate: ___ weeks/months
Estimated dev cost: $___
COGS impact: $___ /month (hosting, infrastructure, processing)
OpEx impact: $___ /month (support, maintenance)
If no ongoing costs, enter $0."
One-time investment: Development cost
Ongoing monthly cost: COGS + OpEx
Contribution margin impact: (Revenue - COGS) / Revenue
If COGS is >20% of projected revenue: "⚠️ This feature significantly dilutes margins"
If ongoing costs are high relative to revenue: "⚠️ Consider if this is sustainable"
Step 3: Evaluate Constraints and Timing "What constraints or timing considerations apply?
Time-sensitive competitive threat — Competitor launched this; we're losing dealsLimited budget/team capacity — We can only build one major feature this quarterDependencies on other work — Requires platform improvements or other features firstNo major constraints — We have capacity and flexibility Choose a number, or describe your constraints."
If 1 (Competitive threat):
Strategic value increases (churn prevention)
Urgency factor in recommendation
Compare ROI against other features in backlog
Recommend stack ranking
Flag dependency risk
Suggest sequencing
Proceed to recommendations
Step 4: Deliver Recommendations
Revenue impact (from Step 1)
Cost structure (from Step 2)
Constraints (from Step 3)
ROI calculation
Strategic value assessment
Agent offers 3-4 recommendations:
Recommendation Pattern 1: Strong Financial Case
ROI >3:1 (direct monetization) or LTV impact >10:1 (retention/expansion)
Positive contribution margin
No major red flags
"Build now — Strong financial case
[Direct/Indirect revenue impact calculation]
Conservative estimate: $___/month
Optimistic estimate: $___/month
Development: $___
Ongoing COGS/OpEx: $___/month
Net margin impact: ___%
Year 1 ROI: ___:1
Payback period: ___ months
Why this makes sense:
[Specific reasoning based on numbers]
Validate pricing/adoption assumptions with customer research
Build MVP to test core value prop
Monitor [specific metric] to measure impact"
Recommendation Pattern 2: Weak Financial Case, Build Anyway (Strategic)
ROI <2:1 or marginal financial impact
But high strategic value (competitive, platform, compliance)
"Build for strategic reasons (financial case is marginal)
Revenue impact: $___/month (modest)
Development cost: $___
ROI: ___:1 (below 3:1 threshold)
[Competitive moat / Platform enabler / Market requirement]
Prevents churn to competitor X
Required for enterprise segment (30% of pipeline)
Recommendation:
Build, but monitor closely:
Track adoption vs. projections
Measure churn impact (target: reduce churn by ___%)
Re-evaluate after 6 months if adoption is low
Risk:
Opportunity cost—other features may have better ROI"
Recommendation Pattern 3: Don't Build (Poor ROI)
ROI <1:1 (direct monetization) or negative LTV impact
Margin-diluting
No compelling strategic value
"Don't build — Financial case doesn't support investment
Revenue impact: $___/month
Development cost: $___
ROI: ___:1 (below breakeven)
Margin impact: Dilutes gross margin from ___% to ___%
Reduce scope — Can we build a simpler version at 50% cost?Change monetization — Can we charge more or differently?Deprioritize — Focus on higher-ROI features like [alternative] What would need to change:
If adoption rate increases from ___% to ___%, ROI becomes viable
If we can reduce dev cost to $___, payback becomes acceptable"
Recommendation Pattern 4: Build Later / Need More Data
Assumptions are highly uncertain
Revenue impact depends on unvalidated hypotheses
Medium strategic value
"Build later — Validate assumptions first
Adoption rate assumption: ___% (needs validation)
Churn impact: ___% reduction (hypothesis, not proven)
Pricing unknown
Run feature demand survey with 50+ customers
Prototype and test willingness-to-pay
Interview churned customers to confirm this addresses churn reason
If % of customers say they'd pay $
If churn interviews confirm this is top 3 reason, build
Otherwise, deprioritize
Spend 2-4 weeks validating
Re-evaluate with real data"
Step 5: Allow Follow-Up Questions
See the detailed math breakdown
Compare this to another feature
Adjust assumptions (pricing, adoption, cost)
Export recommendation summary
Or, ask any follow-up questions."
Show detailed calculations
Sensitivity analysis (what if adoption is 2x? 0.5x?)
Compare multiple features side-by-side
Export summary for stakeholders
Examples See examples/ folder for sample conversation flows. Mini examples below:
Example 1: Direct Monetization (Time Tracking Add-On) User: "We're considering building time tracking as a paid add-on."
Current: 1,000 customers, $500 ARPU, 80% gross margin
Feature: Time tracking add-on, $10/user/month
Dev cost: $100K (2 engineers × 3 months)
Adoption estimate: 20% of customers
Customers with 10 users/account avg = 1,000 accounts × 10 users = 10,000 users
Adoption: 20% of users = 2,000 users
Revenue: 2,000 × $10 = $20K/month = $240K/year
Margin: $240K × 80% = $192K gross profit/year
ROI: $192K / $100K = 1.92:1 in year 1
Payback: $100K / $20K = 5 months
"Build now — Positive ROI with fast payback
Revenue Impact: $240K/year (conservative 20% adoption)
ROI: 1.92:1 in year 1, 3.8:1 in year 2
Payback: 5 months
Fast payback (5 months) means low risk
80% gross margin on add-on revenue
20% adoption is conservative (test willingness-to-pay)
Survey customers: who would pay $10/user for time tracking?
Build MVP with core time tracking only
Beta with 50 customers before broad launch
Track adoption rate vs. 20% target"
Example 2: Retention Feature (Data Export) User: "We're losing customers because they can't export their data easily. Should we build a comprehensive export feature?"
Current: $2M MRR, 500 customers, $4K ARPA, 5% monthly churn
Feature: Full data export (CSV, API, scheduled exports)
Dev cost: $150K (3 engineers × 2 months)
Churn context: 30% of churned customers cited data export as a reason
Current annual churn: ~46% (5% monthly compounded)
Customers churned annually: 500 × 46% = 230 customers
Customers churned due to export issue: 230 × 30% = 69 customers
MRR lost: 69 × $4K = $276K MRR lost/year = $3.3M ARR
If feature reduces this by 50%:
Churn prevented: 35 customers/year
MRR saved: $140K/year
LTV impact (assuming 24-month lifetime): $140K × 24 = $3.36M
Investment: $150K
LTV saved: $3.36M (conservative 50% reduction)
ROI: $3.36M / $150K = 22.4:1 🚀
"Build immediately — Exceptional ROI on retention
Prevents ~35 customer churns/year
Saves $140K MRR annually
LTV impact: $3.36M over customer lifetime
ROI: 22:1 (exceptional)
Why this is a no-brainer:
30% of churn cites this gap (validated problem)
Even if you only prevent 25% (not 50%), ROI is still 11:1
Retention improvements compound (reduces future churn too)
Interview churned customers to validate export was primary reason
Build core export (CSV, API) first
Measure churn rate change after launch (target: 5% → 4.5%)
Add scheduled exports if adoption is high"
Example 3: Poor ROI Feature (Dark Mode) User: "Users are requesting dark mode. Should we prioritize it?"
Current: $500K MRR, 2,000 customers, $250 ARPA, 3% monthly churn, 75% gross margin
Feature: Full dark mode across product
Dev cost: $80K (2 designers + 2 engineers × 1 month)
Revenue connection: Indirect—may improve retention slightly
Agent asks: "What evidence do you have that dark mode will reduce churn?"
User: "Feature requests from 50 users. No data on churn impact."
50 feature requests out of 2,000 customers = 2.5% of base
No validated churn impact
Dev cost: $80K
Optimistic scenario: Prevents 5 churns/year (2.5% of base)
MRR saved: 5 × $250 = $1,250/month = $15K/year
LTV impact (24-month lifetime): $15K × 24 = $360K
ROI: $360K / $80K = 4.5:1 (looks okay, but based on weak assumptions)
"Build later — Weak evidence for ROI
Revenue impact: $15K/year (optimistic)
Development cost: $80K
ROI: 4.5:1 (assumes dark mode prevents churn)
Only 50 users requested this (2.5% of base)
No evidence dark mode reduces churn
Churn interviews don't mention this as a top reason
Survey churned customers — Is dark mode in top 5 churn reasons?Test demand — Ask trial users: "Would dark mode affect your decision to convert?"Reduce scope — Build basic dark mode (20% cost) as experiment Better features to consider:
If retention is priority: Interview churned customers, find top 3 churn drivers
If revenue is priority: Focus on expansion features (upsell, add-ons)
Decision criteria to build:
If churn interviews show dark mode is top 3 reason → build
If conversion research shows 10%+ impact → build
Otherwise → deprioritize"
Common Pitfalls
Pitfall 1: Confusing Revenue with Profit Symptom: "This feature will generate $1M in revenue!" (ignoring $800K COGS)
Consequence: $1M revenue at 20% margin is worth $200K profit, not $1M. Feature looks great until you factor in costs.
Fix: Always calculate contribution margin. Use Revenue × Margin %, not just revenue.
Pitfall 2: Ignoring Payback Period Symptom: "ROI is 5:1, let's build!" (but payback is 36 months and customers churn at 24 months)
Consequence: You never recover the investment because customers leave before payback.
Fix: Check payback period. Must be shorter than average customer lifetime.
Pitfall 3: Overestimating Adoption Symptom: "100% of customers will use this paid add-on!"
Consequence: Real adoption is 10-20%. Revenue projections are 5-10x too high.
Fix: Use conservative adoption estimates (10-20% for add-ons). Validate with willingness-to-pay research.
Pitfall 4: Building Without Validation Symptom: "We think this will reduce churn" (no customer interviews)
Consequence: You build a feature that doesn't address real churn reasons. Churn stays flat.
Fix: Interview churned customers first. Validate that this feature addresses top 3 churn reasons.
Pitfall 5: Ignoring Opportunity Cost Symptom: "This feature has 2:1 ROI, let's build!" (other features have 10:1 ROI)
Consequence: You build a mediocre feature while better options sit in the backlog.
Fix: Compare ROI across features. Build highest-ROI features first (unless strategic value overrides).
Pitfall 6: Strategic Value as Excuse Symptom: "ROI is terrible but it's strategic!" (no clear strategy)
Consequence: "Strategic" becomes a catch-all for building low-value features.
Fix: Define what "strategic" means (competitive moat, platform enabler, compliance). If it doesn't fit, it's not strategic.
Pitfall 7: Margin Dilution Blindness Symptom: "This feature adds $500K revenue!" (but COGS is $400K)
Consequence: Your gross margin drops from 80% to 60%. Feature destroys unit economics.
Fix: Calculate contribution margin. If margin is <50%, reconsider or charge a premium.
Pitfall 8: Celebrating Vanity Metrics Symptom: "This feature will increase engagement!" (but not revenue or retention)
Consequence: You build features that feel good but don't impact business outcomes.
Fix: Tie features to revenue or retention. Engagement is a leading indicator, not an outcome.
Pitfall 9: Forgetting Time Value of Money Symptom: "This feature pays back in 5 years"
Consequence: $1 in 5 years is worth ~$0.65 today (at 9% discount rate). ROI is overstated.
Fix: For long payback periods (>24 months), use NPV (net present value) to discount future cash flows.
Pitfall 10: Building Features for Loud Minorities Symptom: "50 customers requested this!" (out of 10,000)
Consequence: You optimize for 0.5% of your base while ignoring the other 99.5%.
Fix: Weight feature requests by revenue impact or customer segment. 10 enterprise customers > 100 SMB customers if enterprise is your strategy.
References
Related Skills
saas-revenue-growth-metrics — Revenue, ARPU, churn, NRR metrics used in impact calculationssaas-economics-efficiency-metrics — ROI, payback, contribution margin calculationsfinance-metrics-quickref — Quick lookup for formulas and benchmarksacquisition-channel-advisor — Similar ROI framework for channel decisionsfinance-based-pricing-advisor — Pricing impact analysis for monetization features
External Frameworks
RICE Prioritization — Combines Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort (this skill adds financial lens)Value vs. Effort Matrix — This skill quantifies "value" financiallyJobs-to-be-Done — Understand customer problems before evaluating financial impactOpportunity Solution Tree (Teresa Torres) — Map opportunities before calculating ROI
Provenance
Adapted from research/finance/Finance_For_PMs.Putting_It_Together_Synthesis.md (Decision Framework #1)
Quiz scenarios from research/finance/Finance for Product Managers.md
