菜单
Scores backlog items with RICE/WSJF/Kano and files GitHub issues for top candidates. Use when triaging a roadmap or prioritizing features for a sprint.
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt；你也可以切换为直接命令，或下载本地副本。
决定是否安装前，请先阅读 SKILL.md，以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
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。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt；运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market --skill feature-review命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地？可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
正在显示 SKILL.md
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | feature-review |
| description | Scores backlog items with RICE/WSJF/Kano and files GitHub issues for top candidates. Use when triaging a roadmap or prioritizing features for a sprint. |
| alwaysApply | false |
| category | workflow-methodology |
| tags | ["feature-prioritization","backlog-triage","RICE","WSJF","Kano","roadmap"] |
| dependencies | ["imbue:scope-guard"] |
| tools | [] |
| usage_patterns | ["feature-inventory","prioritization-scoring","suggestion-generation","github-integration","research-enrichment"] |
| complexity | intermediate |
| model_hint | standard |
| estimated_tokens | 3500 |
| modules | ["modules/scoring-framework.md","modules/classification-system.md","modules/tradeoff-dimensions.md","modules/research-enrichment.md","modules/configuration.md","modules/multi-metric-evaluation-methodology.md"] |
Run make test-feature-review to verify scoring logic after changes.
feature-review:inventory-complete)feature-review:classified)feature-review:scored)feature-review:tradeoffs-analyzed)feature-review:suggestions-generated)feature-review:issues-created)Review implemented features and suggest new ones using evidence-based prioritization. Create GitHub issues for accepted suggestions.
Feature decisions rely on data. Every feature involves tradeoffs that require evaluation. This skill uses hybrid RICE+WSJF scoring with Kano classification to prioritize work and generates actionable GitHub issues for accepted suggestions.
scope-guard).Discover and categorize existing features:
/feature-review --inventory
Evaluate features against the prioritization framework:
/feature-review
Review gaps and suggest new features:
/feature-review --suggest
Use tome plugin to adjust scores with external evidence:
/feature-review --research
Create issues for accepted suggestions:
/feature-review --suggest --create-issues
feature-review:inventory-complete)Identify features by analyzing:
Output: Feature inventory table.
feature-review:classified)Classify each feature along two axes:
Axis 1: Proactive vs Reactive
| Type | Definition | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Proactive | Anticipates user needs. | Suggestions, prefetching. |
| Reactive | Responds to explicit input. | Form handling, click actions. |
Axis 2: Static vs Dynamic
| Type | Update Pattern | Storage Model |
|---|---|---|
| Static | Incremental, versioned. | File-based, cached. |
| Dynamic | Continuous, streaming. | Database, real-time. |
See classification-system.md for details.
feature-review:scored)Apply hybrid RICE+WSJF scoring:
Feature Score = Value Score / Cost Score
Value Score = (Reach + Impact + Business Value + Time Criticality) / 4
Cost Score = (Effort + Risk + Complexity) / 3
Adjusted Score = Feature Score * Confidence
Scoring Scale: Fibonacci (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13).
Thresholds:
See scoring-framework.md for the framework. See multi-metric-evaluation-methodology.md when one model is not enough: it covers how to combine RICE, WSJF, and Kano, where each model fits, and how to reconcile conflicting signals.
feature-review:tradeoffs-analyzed)Evaluate each feature across quality dimensions:
| Dimension | Question | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Quality | Does it deliver correct results? | 1-5 |
| Latency | Does it meet timing requirements? | 1-5 |
| Token Usage | Is it context-efficient? | 1-5 |
| Resource Usage | Is CPU/memory reasonable? | 1-5 |
| Redundancy | Does it handle failures gracefully? | 1-5 |
| Readability | Can others understand it? | 1-5 |
| Scalability | Will it handle 10x load? | 1-5 |
| Integration | Does it play well with others? | 1-5 |
| API Surface | Is it backward compatible? | 1-5 |
See tradeoff-dimensions.md for criteria.
feature-review:research-enriched)Triggered by: --research flag. Requires tome plugin.
Use tome's multi-source research to adjust scoring factors with external evidence. This phase runs between tradeoff analysis and gap analysis.
tome:synthesize.See research-enrichment.md for the full enrichment protocol, delta calculation, and graceful degradation behavior.
Graceful degradation: If tome is not installed, prints a warning and proceeds with initial scores unchanged.
feature-review:suggestions-generated)feature-review:issues-created)Deferred capture for high-scoring suggestions: After the user confirms which suggestions to act on, any high-scoring suggestion (score > 2.5) that is not acted on should be preserved as a deferred item. Run once per skipped high-scoring suggestion:
python3 scripts/deferred_capture.py \
--title "<suggestion title>" \
--source feature-review \
--context "RICE score: <score>. <description>"
This runs automatically without prompting the user. Suggestions with scores of 2.5 or below do not need to be captured.
Feature-review uses opinionated defaults but allows customization.
Create .feature-review.yaml in project root:
# .feature-review.yaml
version: 1.9.3
# Scoring weights (must sum to 1.0)
weights:
value:
reach: 0.25
impact: 0.30
business_value: 0.25
time_criticality: 0.20
cost:
effort: 0.40
risk: 0.30
complexity: 0.30
# Score thresholds
thresholds:
high_priority: 2.5
medium_priority: 1.5
# Tradeoff dimension weights (0.0 to disable)
tradeoffs:
quality: 1.0
latency: 1.0
token_usage: 1.0
resource_usage: 0.8
redundancy: 0.5
readability: 1.0
scalability: 0.8
integration: 1.0
api_surface: 1.0
See configuration.md for options.
These rules apply to all configurations:
feature-review:inventory-completefeature-review:classifiedfeature-review:scoredfeature-review:tradeoffs-analyzedfeature-review:research-enriched (if --research)feature-review:suggestions-generatedfeature-review:issues-created (if requested)imbue:scope-guard: Provides Worthiness Scores for suggestions.sanctum:do-issue: Prioritizes issues with high scores.superpowers:brainstorming: Evaluates new ideas against existing features.tome:research: Multi-source research for score enrichment (optional, --research).| Feature | Type | Data | Score | Priority | Status |
|---------|------|------|-------|----------|--------|
| Auth middleware | Reactive | Dynamic | 2.8 | High | Stable |
| Skill loader | Reactive | Static | 2.3 | Medium | Needs improvement |
--research)| Feature | Type | Score | Adj. | Priority | Evidence |
|---------|------|-------|------|----------|----------|
| Auth | R/D | 2.8 | 3.1 | High | 3 sources |
| Loader | R/S | 2.3 | 2.3 | Medium | none |
## Research Evidence
### Code Search (GitHub)
- 12 implementations, avg 340 stars
- **Reach**: +1 (broad adoption)
### Discourse (HN/Reddit)
- 47 mentions, 78% positive
- **Impact**: +1 (strong demand)
## Feature Suggestions
### High Priority (Score > 2.5)
1. **[Feature Name]** (Score: 2.7)
- Classification: Proactive/Dynamic
- Value: High reach
- Cost: Moderate effort
- Recommendation: Build in next sprint
imbue:scope-guard: Prevent overengineering.sanctum:pr-review: Code-level review (different scope: this
skill prioritizes feature ideas, pr-review reviews diffs).feature-review:issues-created; each phase marked complete
before the next beginsscripts/deferred_capture.py --source feature-review without
prompting the userfeature, enhancement, and priority/* labels
and a link to related issues where applicableTurn hunches into accepted results: worthiness score, evidence bar, research-to-rules. Use when vetting ideas. Not for QA; use night-market-validation-and-qa.
Generates and self-executes a diff-derived test plan for a PR. Use when validating PR changes before merge. Do not use for code review; use sanctum:pr-review.
Curate the web-capture index. Use when the capture backlog grows, captures sit unprocessed at seedling/pending, or to surface stored research during work.