priority-score

name	priority-score
description	Score feature priorities using Geoff Ralston's (b*d)/c formula — Breadth, Depth, and Cost on 1-5 scales yielding a 1-100 priority score. Use when user wants to prioritize features, decide what to build next, rank a backlog, compare initiatives, or mentions "priority score".

Startup Priorities

Score features with (Breadth x Depth) / Cost, scaled to 1 - 100.

Formula: score = max(1, round(4 * b * d / c))

Score	Band	Emoji	Action
1 - 4	Skip	⚪	Backlog or kill it
5 - 12	Low	🔵	Only if nothing better exists
13 - 24	Moderate	🟡	Schedule in a future sprint
25 - 49	High	🟠	Current or next sprint
50 - 100	Do it now	🔴	Stop what you're doing

Modes

• Autonomous (default): Score all three variables yourself using the litmus tests below and the context available. Output the one-liner immediately. No user interaction unless you hit uncertainty (see below).
• Collaborative: Walk through each variable with the user one at a time. Enter this mode when:
  • The user explicitly asks to collaborate, discuss, or decide on the variables
  • You lack sufficient context to confidently answer a litmus test (e.g. no info on user base size, no way to gauge cost)
  • Two adjacent levels seem equally valid and the difference would change the band

When entering collaborative mode, explain which variable you're uncertain about and why, then use AskUserQuestion for that variable only. Return to autonomous for the rest.

Input spectrums

Each level has a litmus test — a yes/no question that pins the score and removes ambiguity.

Breadth (b) — reach across current users + validated TAM

Score based on current users or TAM expansion — whichever is higher. TAM claims require evidence (waitlist, inbound requests, competitor data, LOIs). "We think the market is big" without evidence stays at b=1.

b	Label	Current users	OR TAM expansion (with evidence)
1	Niche	<5%, named accounts	No TAM signal
2	Narrow	5-20%, one segment	A few inbound requests from non-users
3	Moderate	20-50%, multiple segments	Validated demand: waitlist, competitor proof
4	Broad	50-80%, most weekly actives	Large reachable TAM segment via existing channels
5	Universal	>80%, all users incl. new signups	Unlocks dominant share of TAM

Depth (d) — observable user behavior, not your guess

d	Label	Litmus test
1	Cosmetic	If you shipped it silently, would anyone open a ticket or mention it? (No)
2	Convenience	Do affected users have a workaround they tolerate without complaining? (Yes)
3	Meaningful	Do users bring this up unprompted in feedback calls or surveys? (Yes)
4	Critical	Is it a top-10 feature request? Have sales deals stalled or required workarounds because of it? (Yes)
5	Existential	Have users churned explicitly citing this gap, or is a new market segment blocked without it? (Yes)

Cost (c) — scope of the engineering work

c	Label	Litmus test
1	Trivial	Can one person ship it today — config change, copy fix, flag flip? (Yes)
2	Small	One person, 1-3 days, isolated to one component, standard PR? (Yes)
3	Medium	Needs a design discussion, touches 3+ files across 2+ modules, may need QA beyond unit tests? (Yes)
4	Large	Requires cross-team coordination, a migration plan, or staging env testing? (Yes)
5	Massive	Would you create a project plan with milestones and track it weekly? (Yes)

Workflow

Autonomous (default)

1. Read the feature/task/goal from context.
2. Score each variable using the litmus tests. For each, identify which litmus test applies.
3. If confident on all three, compute and output the one-liner directly:

   <emoji> Priority Score: <score>(<band>) - <archetype>: <brief why>
   

4. If scoring multiple features, output a ranked list of one-liners.

Collaborative (on uncertainty or user request)

1. Present the spectrum tables so the user sees the litmus tests.
2. For each uncertain variable, explain the uncertainty and use AskUserQuestion.
3. Score confident variables autonomously — only ask about the ones you can't pin.
4. Compute and output the one-liner.

Showing your work

When outputting the one-liner, always follow it with a brief breakdown so the user can challenge the score:

<emoji> Priority Score: <score>(<band>) - <archetype>: <brief why>
    b=<b>(<label>) d=<d>(<label>) c=<c>(<label>)

Key rules

• Early-stage caveat: pre-PMF, Depth > Breadth. 100 devoted users beat 1000 lukewarm ones. Call this out when presenting results.
• This is a thinking tool, not a replacement for judgment.
• When uncertain about a variable, ask — don't guess. A wrong score is worse than a slow score.

See REFERENCE.md for archetypes, worked examples, and band analysis.