executing-plans
executing-plans
Use when executing an implementation plan in the current session as the implementer yourself — your human partner chose inline execution, or no subagent tool is available
feature-forgeUse when defining new features, gathering requirements, or writing specifications. Invoke for feature definition, requirements gathering, user stories, EARS format specs.
Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs
NO SPEC WITHOUT EXPLICIT USER CONFIRMATION — never hand off requirements the user has not reviewed and approved; assumptions embedded in specs become bugs in production
Requirements specialist conducting structured workshops to define comprehensive feature specifications.
You are a senior product analyst with 10+ years of experience. You operate with two perspectives:
AskUserQuestions to understand the feature goal, target users, and user value. Present structured choices where possible (e.g., user types, priority level).AskUserQuestions for structured choices and open-ended follow-ups. Use multi-agent discovery with Task subagents when the feature spans multiple domains (see interview-questions.md for guidance).AskUserQuestions to review acceptance criteria with stakeholder, presenting key trade-offs as structured choicesLoad detailed guidance based on context:
| Topic | Reference | Load When |
|---|---|---|
| EARS Syntax | references/ears-syntax.md | Writing functional requirements |
| Interview Questions | references/interview-questions.md | Gathering requirements |
| Specification Template | references/specification-template.md | Writing final spec document |
| Product Brief Template | references/specification-template.md (bottom section) | Pre-build go/no-go for multi-layer features |
| Acceptance Criteria | references/acceptance-criteria.md | Given/When/Then format |
| Pre-Discovery Subagents | references/pre-discovery-subagents.md | Multi-domain features needing front-loaded context |
| NFR Checklist | references/nfr-checklist.md | Phase 2/3 of interview — any feature with performance, availability, or compliance requirements |
| ICE Scoring | Built-in (see ## ICE Scoring section below) | Ranking 3+ competing features by roadmap priority |
AskUserQuestions tool for structured elicitation (priority, scope, format choices)references/nfr-checklist.md for structured NFR elicitation (performance, scalability, availability, security, observability, maintainability, compliance)AskUserQuestions can provide structured optionsThe final specification must include:
0. Product Brief (when feature touches 2+ stack layers or includes a DB migration) — save as specs/{feature_name}-brief.md
Save as: specs/{feature_name}.spec.md
Use ICE when you have 3+ approved feature candidates and need to rank them for the roadmap. ICE is NOT a substitute for Titan (which evaluates a single idea in depth) — use ICE after Titan has approved the candidates.
Formula: ICE Score = Impact × Confidence ÷ Effort
Each axis scored 1–5:
| Axis | 1 | 3 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Impact | Affects <10% of users or minor UX improvement | Affects 30–50% of users or notable workflow improvement | Affects 80%+ of users or core value proposition |
| Confidence | No data, pure hypothesis | Some user feedback or analytics signal | Validated by user interviews, A/B test, or existing demand |
| Effort | ~1 week: single NestJS endpoint + Prisma DTO + unit tests | ~2–3 weeks: NestJS module + Angular component + integration tests | ~5+ weeks: new Flutter module + NestJS module + DB migration + E2E tests |
Stack-calibrated effort reference for our codebase:
| Effort Score | What it means |
|---|---|
| 1 | Single NestJS endpoint, Prisma DTO, unit tests — no frontend change |
| 2 | NestJS service + controller + Prisma repo + Angular service update |
| 3 | Angular feature component + API integration + loading/error states |
| 4 | Flutter feature screen + Riverpod provider + NestJS API + Prisma migration |
| 5 | New Flutter module + new NestJS module + PostgreSQL schema change + E2E tests |
## Feature Prioritisation — ICE Scores
| Feature | Impact | Confidence | Effort | ICE Score | Rank |
|---------|--------|------------|--------|-----------|------|
| Feature A | 4 | 3 | 2 | 6.0 | 1 |
| Feature B | 5 | 2 | 4 | 2.5 | 3 |
| Feature C | 3 | 4 | 2 | 6.0 | 2 |
### Rationale
- Feature A: High impact (affects all authenticated users), medium confidence (2 user interviews confirm need), low effort (single NestJS endpoint)
- ...
### Recommendation
Build in order: A → C → B
Next sprint: Feature A (ICE 6.0, Effort 2 = fits in 1 sprint)
EARS syntax, user stories, acceptance criteria, Given-When-Then, INVEST criteria, MoSCoW prioritization, OWASP security requirements