scoping-cutting
Right-size scope to ship within a fixed timebox (appetite). Produces a Scoping & Cutting Pack: appetite, minimum lovable slice, cut list, validation plan, and a scope-creep guardrail plan. Use for MVP/descoping/scope creep.
What this skill does
# Scoping & Cutting ## Scope **Covers** - Converting a fuzzy initiative into a **ship-able slice** that fits a fixed time budget (“appetite”) - Creating a **cut list** (what to drop/defer) with explicit trade-offs and rationale - Defining an MVP as a **hypothesis test** (what you’re validating, not just “smaller”) - Choosing a **Minimum Lovable Slice** (viable *and* emotionally resonant) instead of a “barely works” release - Using **Wizard-of-Oz / concierge** approaches to validate value before building full automation - Preventing scope creep via explicit **non-goals + change control** **When to use** - “Cut scope / descope this feature so we can ship by <date>.” - “Define an MVP for this initiative (what hypothesis are we testing?).” - “We have 2–6 weeks; what can we ship that still matters?” - “Scope creep is killing us; define what’s in/out and how changes happen.” - “We need a minimum lovable version, not a compromised mess.” **When NOT to use** - You don’t yet know what problem you’re solving (use `problem-definition`) - You’re choosing between many competing initiatives (use `prioritizing-roadmap`) - You need a decision-ready PRD with requirements (use `writing-prds`) or a build-ready design/tech spec (use `writing-specs-designs`) - You’re setting long-term product strategy or vision (use `defining-product-vision`) ## Inputs **Minimum required** - The initiative/feature and the **decision** (ship vs defer vs stop) + target date or time budget - Target user/segment + the **core user journey** you want to improve - Success metric(s) + 2–5 guardrails (trust, quality, cost, latency, support load) - Constraints and non-negotiables (legal/privacy, platform, dependencies, team size) - Candidate scope items (bullets are fine) + known unknowns **Missing-info strategy** - Ask up to 5 questions from [references/INTAKE.md](references/INTAKE.md). - If answers aren’t available, proceed with explicit assumptions and list **Open questions** that would change the cut decisions. ## Outputs (deliverables) Produce a **Scoping & Cutting Pack** in Markdown (in-chat; or as files if the user requests): 1) **Context snapshot** (decision, date/appetite, stakeholders/DRI, constraints) 2) **Outcome + hypothesis** (what must be true; what you’ll validate) 3) **Appetite + success bar** (time budget, “done means…”, guardrails) 4) **Minimum Lovable Slice spec** (core flow, must-haves, non-goals) 5) **Cut list** (cut/defer/keep with rationale + impact on risks) 6) **Validation plan** (Wizard-of-Oz/concierge/prototype as needed) + success criteria 7) **Delivery plan** (milestones within appetite + scope-change rules) 8) **Risks / Open questions / Next steps** (always included) Templates: [references/TEMPLATES.md](references/TEMPLATES.md) Expanded guidance: [references/WORKFLOW.md](references/WORKFLOW.md) ## Workflow (8 steps) ### 1) Intake + decision framing - **Inputs:** User request; [references/INTAKE.md](references/INTAKE.md). - **Actions:** Clarify the decision, date/appetite, DRI, constraints, and what “shipping” means (where it lands, who uses it). - **Outputs:** Context snapshot. - **Checks:** You can state: “We are deciding to ship <slice> by <date> with <team> under <constraints>.” ### 2) Define the outcome and hypothesis (MVP = test) - **Inputs:** Context snapshot; current evidence/risks. - **Actions:** Write the outcome in user terms; define the key hypothesis (or 2–3). Choose success metric(s) + guardrails. - **Outputs:** Outcome + hypothesis section; metrics/guardrails. - **Checks:** You can answer: “What will we learn/validate by shipping this slice?” ### 3) Set appetite (time as a budget) + non-negotiables - **Inputs:** Target date/timebox; constraints; team capacity. - **Actions:** Set a hard time budget (e.g., 2/4/6 weeks). List non-negotiables (policy, privacy, reliability, design constraints). - **Outputs:** Appetite + constraints section. - **Checks:** Appetite is explicit and agreed; scope is the variable, not the deadline. ### 4) Design the Minimum Lovable Slice (MLS) - **Inputs:** Outcome + constraints; candidate scope items. - **Actions:** Define the smallest end-to-end flow that delivers the core value and feels coherent. Add 1–2 “lovability” elements that increase trust/clarity (not random polish). - **Outputs:** MLS spec (core flow, must-haves, non-goals, assumptions). - **Checks:** The slice is end-to-end (not a partial subsystem) and a user could describe why it’s valuable. ### 5) Build a cut list with explicit trade-offs - **Inputs:** MLS spec + candidate scope items. - **Actions:** Create a table of items to **keep / cut / defer**, with rationale tied to outcome, risk, and appetite. Convert “nice-to-haves” into “later” with a clear trigger for revisiting. - **Outputs:** Cut list table + short decision rationale. - **Checks:** Every removed item has a reason; non-goals are as clear as goals. ### 6) Add a validation plan (Wizard-of-Oz / concierge where helpful) - **Inputs:** Riskiest assumptions; cut list. - **Actions:** Choose the fastest validation method to de-risk the top unknown(s) (manual ops, scripted demo, prototype). Define what data/feedback counts as “validated”. - **Outputs:** Validation plan (method, audience, script, success criteria, timeline). - **Checks:** The plan can run without building the full system; success criteria are defined before running it. ### 7) Delivery plan + scope-change guardrails - **Inputs:** MLS spec; validation plan; appetite. - **Actions:** Break the work into milestones that fit the appetite. Define scope-change rules (how requests are evaluated; what gets traded off; who decides). - **Outputs:** Delivery plan + scope-change policy. - **Checks:** New scope can only enter by removing or shrinking something else (“trade, don’t add”). ### 8) Quality gate + finalize - **Inputs:** Full draft pack. - **Actions:** Run [references/CHECKLISTS.md](references/CHECKLISTS.md) and score with [references/RUBRIC.md](references/RUBRIC.md). Ensure **Risks / Open questions / Next steps** are present with owners. - **Outputs:** Final Scoping & Cutting Pack. - **Checks:** A stakeholder can approve the slice async and the team can execute without re-litigating scope. ## Quality gate (required) - Use [references/CHECKLISTS.md](references/CHECKLISTS.md) and [references/RUBRIC.md](references/RUBRIC.md). - Always include: **Risks**, **Open questions**, **Next steps**. ## Examples **Example 1 (B2B SaaS):** “Cut scope for ‘bulk CSV import’ so we can ship a useful version in 4 weeks; include a Wizard-of-Oz validation plan.” Expected: an appetite-based MLS, a cut/defer table, and a validation plan that tests value before building every edge case. **Example 2 (Consumer):** “Define a minimum lovable first version of ‘saved searches’ for mobile within a 2-week appetite.” Expected: a coherent end-to-end slice, explicit non-goals, and a scope-change policy to prevent creep. **Boundary example:** “Decide what our Q2 roadmap should be across 12 initiatives.” Response: use `prioritizing-roadmap` first; then apply this skill to right-size the chosen initiative.
Related in General
modeling-omnistudio-epc-catalog
IncludedSalesforce Industries CME EPC product-modeling skill for Product2-based catalog creation. Use when creating EPC products, configuring product attributes, building offer bundles with Product Child Items, or reviewing EPC DataPack JSON metadata for product catalog changes. TRIGGER when: user creates or updates Product2 EPC records, AttributeAssignment payloads, AttributeMetadata/AttributeDefaultValues, Offer bundles, or ProductChildItem relationships. DO NOT TRIGGER when: designing OmniScripts/FlexCards/Integration Procedures (use building-omnistudio-omniscript, building-omnistudio-flexcard, or building-omnistudio-integration-procedure), implementing Apex business logic (use generating-apex), or troubleshooting deployment pipelines (use deploying-metadata).
relationship-science-coach
IncludedUse this skill for direct, practical adult relationship coaching: couples conflict, repair, trust, marriage, dating, flirting, attachment patterns, emotional connection, sex, desire differences, eroticism, kink negotiation, affection, love languages, breakups, and long-term passion. Draw on Gottman, EFT and Hold Me Tight, attachment science, modern sex research, Perel, Nagoski, Kerner, Schnarch, Love and Stosny, and flexible love-language tools. Be concrete and low-hedge. Redirect only for imminent danger, abuse, coercive control, minors, non-consent, self-harm, stalking, or medical/legal/psychiatric decisions.
building-sf-integrations
IncludedSalesforce integration architecture and runtime plumbing with 120-point scoring. Use this skill to set up Named Credentials, External Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callout patterns, Platform Events, and Change Data Capture. TRIGGER when: user sets up Named Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callouts, Platform Events, CDC, or touches .namedCredential-meta.xml files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: Connected App/OAuth config (use configuring-connected-apps), Apex-only logic (use generating-apex), or data import/export (use handling-sf-data).
venue-templates
IncludedAccess comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.
let-fate-decide
IncludedDraws the 12 Houses of the Zodiac Tarot spread to inject entropy into planning when prompts are vague, ambiguous, or casually delegated. Interprets the spread to guide next steps. Use when the user says 'let fate decide', 'YOLO', 'whatever', 'idk', or other nonchalant phrases, makes Yu-Gi-Oh references, or when you are about to arbitrarily pick between multiple reasonable approaches. Prefer over ask-questions-if-underspecified when the user's tone is casual or playful rather than precision-seeking.
net-ops
IncludedCross-platform network troubleshooting (Windows, macOS, Linux) via local or remote shell. Use for: DNS broken, can't resolve hostnames, nslookup/dig works but apps fail, NRPT, WFP, scutil, /etc/resolver, systemd-resolved, /etc/resolv.conf, NetworkManager, VPN DNS leak residue (ProtonVPN/Mullvad/WireGuard/AnyConnect), AV/firewall blocking DNS or DoH, Tailscale DNS interaction, intermittent connectivity, remote diagnostics over SSH.