소스 정보
- 저장소
- fabioc-aloha/BrainBenchmark
- 최근 소스 활동
- 2026년 3월 8일 18:06
- 감지된 SKILL.md 언어
- 영어
- 스타
- 0
- 포크
- 0
설치 방법
기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.
소스 파일 검토
설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.
메뉴
기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.
설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
직접 명령은 검토 Prompt를 거치지 않습니다. 실행하기 전에 소스를 확인하세요.
npx skills add https://github.com/fabioc-aloha/BrainBenchmark --skill scope-management명령은 한 줄로 유지됩니다. 복사하기 전에 가로로 스크롤해 전체 내용을 확인하세요.
로컬 사본을 원하시나요? SkillsMP에서 현재 제공할 수 있는 파일을 다운로드하세요.
SKILL.md 표시 중
SOC 직업 분류 기준
| name | scope-management |
| description | Recognize scope creep, suggest MVP cuts, and manage project boundaries |
Recognize scope creep, suggest MVP cuts, and help maintain healthy project boundaries. The art of delivering the right thing, not everything.
"A good project ships. A perfect project ships never."
Scope management isn't about saying "no" — it's about saying "yes" to the right things at the right time.
| Signal | Indicator | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Feature addition | "While we're at it, let's also..." | "That's a great idea — for v2. Let's capture it." |
| Perfectionism | "It's not quite right yet..." | "What's the minimum that solves the problem?" |
| Edge cases | "What if someone does X?" | "How common is X? Let's handle the 80% first." |
| Gold plating | "Users might want..." | "Have users asked for this, or are we guessing?" |
| Unclear boundaries | "This might be useful..." | "Let's define done before adding more." |
| Endless research | "We should investigate more..." | "What decision does this research enable?" |
HEALTHY SCOPE:
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ✅ Core Feature │
│ ✅ User Need │
│ ✅ MVP Requirement │
│ ----------------------------------- │
│ 📋 Phase 2 (captured, not now) │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
SCOPE CREEP:
┌──────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ✅ Core Feature │
│ ⚠️ "Nice to have" │
│ ⚠️ Edge case handling │
│ ⚠️ Extra polish │
│ ⚠️ "While we're here..." │
│ ❌ Gold plating │
│ ❌ Premature optimization │
└──────────────────────────────────────┘
| Priority | Meaning | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Must have | Critical path | Won't work without it |
| Should have | Important | Significant value, but workaround exists |
| Could have | Nice to have | Adds polish, not essential |
| Won't have | Out of scope | Explicitly excluded (for now) |
## MVP Definition: [Feature/Project]
### Must Have (Ship-blocking)
- [ ] [Core functionality 1]
- [ ] [Core functionality 2]
### Should Have (Target for v1.0)
- [ ] [Important enhancement 1]
- [ ] [Important enhancement 2]
### Could Have (If time permits)
- [ ] [Nice to have 1]
- [ ] [Nice to have 2]
### Won't Have (Explicitly v2+)
- [ ] [Future idea 1]
- [ ] [Future idea 2]
### Definition of Done
[ ] [Specific, measurable completion criteria]
When someone suggests additions:
"That's a great idea. Let me add it to the backlog for Phase 2
so we don't lose it. For now, let's ship the core first."
When scope must grow:
"We can add X, but something needs to come out to keep the timeline.
Options:
A) Add X, defer Y to next release
B) Add X, extend timeline by Z days
C) Keep current scope, add X to backlog
Which works best for stakeholders?"
When features keep adding:
"Quick check: If we shipped today with just what we have,
would users get value? If yes, maybe we're already at MVP."
When perfectionism strikes:
"This handles the 80% case. The remaining 20% is complex.
Ship now, gather feedback, then decide if the 20% is worth it?"
For good ideas at bad times:
"Great idea but out of scope for this sprint.
Added to the parking lot — we'll prioritize it next planning."
| Metric | Healthy | Warning | Critical |
|---|---|---|---|
| Requirements | Stable | 1-2 changes/week | Daily changes |
| Timeline | On track | Slipping | Blown |
| Team confidence | High | Uncertain | Low |
| Stakeholder alignment | Clear | Some confusion | Conflicting |
| Done definition | Specific | Vague | Missing |
Calculate scope complexity:
Base features: ___ × 1 point = ___
Integrations: ___ × 2 points = ___
Edge cases: ___ × 1 point = ___
New technologies: ___ × 3 points = ___
Dependencies: ___ × 2 points = ___
─────────────────────
TOTAL: ___
0-10: Simple — ship fast
11-25: Moderate — careful planning
26+: Complex — consider splitting
| Question | If Yes → |
|---|---|
| "Does this block launch?" | Keep it |
| "Can users workaround this?" | Defer it |
| "Is this proven valuable?" | Keep if proven |
| "Are we guessing about need?" | Validate first |
| "Can this be added later?" | Defer it |
| "Will this delay other must-haves?" | Defer it |
/scopecheck
Output:
📊 Scope Health Report
Current scope: 12 features
- Must have: 5 ✅
- Should have: 4 🔄
- Could have: 3 ⏳
Complexity score: 18 (Moderate)
Recommendation: Consider deferring 2 "could have" items
to hit timeline with confidence.
Alert when:
Ship small, ship often, ship something.