Best for
- Roadmap reviews (sprint planning, quarterly reviews).
- Retrospective evaluations.
- Planning new development cycles.
athola/claude-night-market/plugins/imbue/skills/feature-review/SKILL.md
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.
Decision brief
Scores backlog items with RICE/WSJF/Kano and files GitHub issues for top candidates.
Compatibility matrix
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market --skill "plugins/imbue/skills/feature-review"Inspect the Agent Skill "feature-review" from https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market/blob/90037391d2db6536f67a7ccc8dee7c6819f170b7/plugins/imbue/skills/feature-review/SKILL.md at commit 90037391d2db6536f67a7ccc8dee7c6819f170b7. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
Run make test-feature-review to verify scoring logic after changes. - 4. Upload to GitHub - Workflow - Phase 1: Feature Discovery (feature-review:inventory-complete)) - Phase 2: Classification (feature-review:classified)) - Phase 3: Scoring (feature-review:scored)) - Phase 4: Tr…
Review implemented features and suggest new ones using evidence-based prioritization. Create GitHub issues for accepted suggestions.
Discover and categorize existing features:
Identify features by analyzing:
Identify features by analyzing:
Permission review
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
python3 scripts/deferred_capture.py \Evidence record
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 93/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 330 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
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 applicableFrequently asked questions
Scores backlog items with RICE/WSJF/Kano and files GitHub issues for top candidates.
The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market --skill "plugins/imbue/skills/feature-review". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.
Static rules flagged exec-script in the source; the page lists the matching lines and excerpts.
Alternatives
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist
brucesongs/kali-claw
Insecure Design (OWASP A06:2025) focuses on security flaws in system architecture and design phases, rather than code implementation-level bugs.
NintendaDev/unikit-ai
Generate and maintain the project's TECHNICAL documentation from its codebase — scans the project structure, tech stack, and module boundaries, then writes a lean README landing page plus detailed topic pages (architecture, modules, setup, build, APIs), only the docs that are relevant. Use whenever the user wants to create, update, or validate documentation of the CODE or the project itself, e.g. "generate documentation", "create docs", "write the README", "update the project docs", "document th
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
Distributed computing for larger-than-RAM pandas/NumPy workflows. Use when you need to scale existing pandas/NumPy code beyond memory or across clusters. Best for parallel file processing, distributed ML, integration with existing pandas code. For out-of-core analytics on single machine use vaex; for in-memory speed use polars.