菜单
Generate phased implementation roadmaps with Epic/Story/Task breakdown, effort estimates, and validation checkpoints. Use when cto-architect needs to create actionable technical roadmaps from architecture designs.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | roadmap-generator |
| description | Generate phased implementation roadmaps with Epic/Story/Task breakdown, effort estimates, and validation checkpoints. Use when cto-architect needs to create actionable technical roadmaps from architecture designs. |
Creates structured implementation roadmaps that transform architecture designs into actionable plans with clear phases, milestones, and validation gates.
Every roadmap follows MVP → Scale → Advanced phases:
Phase 1: MVP (Foundation)
├── Goal: Prove core value proposition
├── Duration: Typically 6-12 weeks
├── Success Criteria: Core functionality working
└── Exit Gate: User validation / metrics threshold
Phase 2: Scale (Growth)
├── Goal: Handle production load, improve reliability
├── Duration: Typically 8-16 weeks
├── Success Criteria: Performance SLAs met
└── Exit Gate: Load testing passed / uptime targets
Phase 3: Advanced (Optimization)
├── Goal: Competitive features, optimization
├── Duration: Ongoing
├── Success Criteria: Feature parity / differentiation
└── Exit Gate: Business metrics achieved
High-level capability that delivers business value.
User-facing functionality within an epic.
Technical work to complete a story.
| Size | Story Points | Typical Duration | Characteristics |
|---|---|---|---|
| XS | 1 | 2-4 hours | Trivial change, no unknowns |
| S | 2 | 0.5-1 day | Simple, well-understood |
| M | 3 | 1-2 days | Some complexity, minor unknowns |
| L | 5 | 3-5 days | Complex, some research needed |
| XL | 8 | 1-2 weeks | Very complex, significant unknowns |
| XXL | 13+ | > 2 weeks | Should be broken down |
Effective Capacity = Team Size × Working Days × Focus Factor × Skill Factor
Focus Factor:
- Dedicated team: 0.8
- 50% allocated: 0.4
- Ad-hoc: 0.2
Skill Factor:
- Expert team: 1.0
- Experienced: 0.8
- Learning curve: 0.5
Each phase ends with a validation gate:
## Phase 1 Exit Gate
### Go Criteria
- [ ] Core features functional in staging
- [ ] Unit test coverage > 70%
- [ ] Integration tests passing
- [ ] Performance baseline established
- [ ] Security review completed
### No-Go Signals
- Critical bugs unresolved
- Core functionality missing
- Team capacity insufficient for Phase 2
- Business requirements changed significantly
### Decision
[ ] GO - Proceed to Phase 2
[ ] CONDITIONAL GO - Proceed with identified risks
[ ] NO-GO - Address blockers first
| Type | Description | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | Service A needs Service B | Start B early, use mocks |
| Team | Need DevOps for deployment | Reserve capacity early |
| External | Third-party API integration | Validate early, have fallback |
| Data | Need production data for testing | Create synthetic data |
# Implementation Roadmap: [Project Name]
**Created**: [Date]
**Owner**: [Team/Person]
**Architecture Reference**: [Link to architecture doc]
## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentences on approach and timeline]
## Timeline Overview
[Visual timeline or Gantt representation]
## Phase 1: MVP (Weeks 1-8)
### Phase Goals
- [Goal 1]
- [Goal 2]
### Epics
#### Epic 1.1: [Name]
**Duration**: [X weeks]
**Dependencies**: [List]
| Story | Points | Owner | Dependencies |
|-------|--------|-------|--------------|
| [Story 1] | M | [Team] | None |
| [Story 2] | L | [Team] | Story 1 |
**Tasks for Story 1**:
- [ ] [Task 1] (S)
- [ ] [Task 2] (M)
### Phase 1 Exit Criteria
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]
### Phase 1 Risks
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-------------|--------|------------|
| [Risk] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Action] |
---
## Phase 2: Scale (Weeks 9-16)
[Same structure as Phase 1]
---
## Phase 3: Advanced (Weeks 17+)
[Same structure as Phase 1]
---
## Resource Requirements
### Team Composition
| Role | Phase 1 | Phase 2 | Phase 3 |
|------|---------|---------|---------|
| Backend | 2 FTE | 3 FTE | 2 FTE |
| Frontend | 1 FTE | 2 FTE | 1 FTE |
| DevOps | 0.5 FTE | 1 FTE | 0.5 FTE |
### Infrastructure Costs
| Phase | Monthly Cost | Notes |
|-------|-------------|-------|
| Phase 1 | $X | Development environment |
| Phase 2 | $Y | Staging + production |
| Phase 3 | $Z | Full scale |
---
## Success Metrics
| Metric | Phase 1 Target | Phase 2 Target | Phase 3 Target |
|--------|---------------|----------------|----------------|
| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
---
## Appendix
### Assumptions
- [Assumption 1]
- [Assumption 2]
### Open Questions
- [Question 1]
- [Question 2]
Planning everything in detail upfront without iteration. Fix: Plan Phase 1 in detail, Phase 2 at epic level, Phase 3 at theme level.
Listing features without connecting to business outcomes. Fix: Every epic must connect to a measurable business goal.
No buffer, no risk mitigation, assumes everything goes perfectly. Fix: Add 25-30% buffer, identify top 5 risks with mitigations.
Including every possible feature in MVP. Fix: Ruthlessly cut to core value proposition only.
This skill includes Python utilities for roadmap generation:
generator.py - Core roadmap generation logictemplates/ - Output templates (markdown, JSON)See generator.py for programmatic roadmap generation.
Detect common technical and organizational anti-patterns in proposals, architectures, and plans. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to identify red flags before they become problems.
Recommend architecture patterns (monolith, microservices, serverless, modular monolith) based on scale, team size, and constraints. Use when cto-architect needs to select the right architectural approach for a new system or migration.
Identify and challenge implicit assumptions in plans, proposals, and technical decisions. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to surface hidden assumptions and wishful thinking before they become costly mistakes.
Generate targeted clarifying questions (2-3 max) that challenge vague requirements and extract missing context. Use after request-analyzer identifies clarification needs, before routing to specialist agents. Helps cto-orchestrator avoid delegating unclear requirements.
Infrastructure and development cost estimation for technical projects. Use when planning budgets, evaluating build vs buy decisions, or projecting TCO for architecture choices.
Transform clarified user requests into structured delegation prompts optimized for specialist agents (cto-architect, strategic-cto-mentor, cv-ml-architect). Use after clarification is complete, before routing to specialist agents. Ensures agents receive complete context for effective work.