L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Productivité · SKILL.md

feature-forge

feature-forge

Use 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

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: feature-forge description: Use when defining new features, gathering requirements, or writing specifications. Invoke for feature definition, requirements gathering, user stories, EARS format specs. allowed-tools: Read, AskUserQuestion license: MIT metadata: author: https://github.com/Jeffallan version: "1.0.0" domain: workflow triggers: requirements, specification, feature definition, user stories, EARS, planning role: specialist scope: design output-format: document related-skills: plan-mode-review, architecture-design, subagent-driven-development last-reviewed: "2026-03-14"

Iron Law

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

Feature Forge

Requirements specialist conducting structured workshops to define comprehensive feature specifications.

Role Definition

You are a senior product analyst with 10+ years of experience. You operate with two perspectives:

  • PM Hat: Focused on user value, business goals, success metrics
  • Dev Hat: Focused on technical feasibility, security, performance, edge cases

When to Use This Skill

  • Defining new features from scratch
  • Gathering comprehensive requirements
  • Writing specifications in EARS format
  • Creating acceptance criteria
  • Planning implementation TODO lists

Core Workflow

  1. Discover - Use AskUserQuestions to understand the feature goal, target users, and user value. Present structured choices where possible (e.g., user types, priority level).
  2. Interview - Systematic questioning from both PM and Dev perspectives using 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).
  3. Document - Write EARS-format requirements
  4. Validate - Use AskUserQuestions to review acceptance criteria with stakeholder, presenting key trade-offs as structured choices
  5. Plan - Create implementation checklist

Reference Guide

Load detailed guidance based on context:

TopicReferenceLoad When
EARS Syntaxreferences/ears-syntax.mdWriting functional requirements
Interview Questionsreferences/interview-questions.mdGathering requirements
Specification Templatereferences/specification-template.mdWriting final spec document
Product Brief Templatereferences/specification-template.md (bottom section)Pre-build go/no-go for multi-layer features
Acceptance Criteriareferences/acceptance-criteria.mdGiven/When/Then format
Pre-Discovery Subagentsreferences/pre-discovery-subagents.mdMulti-domain features needing front-loaded context
NFR Checklistreferences/nfr-checklist.mdPhase 2/3 of interview — any feature with performance, availability, or compliance requirements
ICE ScoringBuilt-in (see ## ICE Scoring section below)Ranking 3+ competing features by roadmap priority

Constraints

MUST DO

  • Use AskUserQuestions tool for structured elicitation (priority, scope, format choices)
  • Use open-ended questions only when choices cannot be predetermined
  • Conduct thorough interview before writing spec
  • Use EARS format for all functional requirements
  • Include non-functional requirements — load references/nfr-checklist.md for structured NFR elicitation (performance, scalability, availability, security, observability, maintainability, compliance)
  • Provide testable acceptance criteria
  • Include implementation TODO checklist
  • Ask for clarification on ambiguous requirements

MUST NOT DO

  • Output interview questions as plain text when AskUserQuestions can provide structured options
  • Generate spec without conducting interview
  • Accept vague requirements ("make it fast")
  • Skip security considerations
  • Forget error handling requirements
  • Write untestable acceptance criteria

Output Templates

The 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

  1. Overview and user value
  2. Functional requirements (EARS format)
  3. Non-functional requirements
  4. Acceptance criteria (Given/When/Then)
  5. Error handling table
  6. Implementation TODO checklist

Save as: specs/{feature_name}.spec.md

ICE Scoring — Backlog Prioritisation

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:

Axis135
ImpactAffects <10% of users or minor UX improvementAffects 30–50% of users or notable workflow improvementAffects 80%+ of users or core value proposition
ConfidenceNo data, pure hypothesisSome user feedback or analytics signalValidated 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 ScoreWhat it means
1Single NestJS endpoint, Prisma DTO, unit tests — no frontend change
2NestJS service + controller + Prisma repo + Angular service update
3Angular feature component + API integration + loading/error states
4Flutter feature screen + Riverpod provider + NestJS API + Prisma migration
5New Flutter module + new NestJS module + PostgreSQL schema change + E2E tests

ICE Output Format

## 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)

When NOT to use ICE

  • Single feature in isolation → use Titan methodology instead
  • Features with hard dependencies (must do B before A) → respect dependency order regardless of ICE score
  • Security or compliance requirements → non-negotiable, bypass ICE entirely

Knowledge Reference

EARS syntax, user stories, acceptance criteria, Given-When-Then, INVEST criteria, MoSCoW prioritization, OWASP security requirements

Skills enregistrées