--- name: fbarrento/product-roadmap source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/fbarrento-product-roadmap@1/SKILL.md source_sha256: ae7474a14c19 --- # Product Roadmap ## What this skill does `product-roadmap` produces `product/roadmap.md` — the product's sequenced intent: which value slices the product should ship next, across which capabilities, in what order, and why. It is authored top-down from the strategy and the capability map. It is advisory — a roadmap item is the recommended starting point for a change, never a gate. It is product-level state, a sibling of `vision.md` and `strategy.md`, and it can be re-run to reconcile with a changed strategy or capability map. ## Where the state tree lives Generic skill — hard-codes no path. Resolve the state-tree root from the project's `CLAUDE.md` (project-declared paths, DESIGN_PRODUCT_PIPELINE.md §2); default `docs/`, and say which you used. `{state-root}` is that root, so the roadmap lives at `{state-root}/product/roadmap.md`, the strategy at `{state-root}/product/strategy.md`, the vision at `{state-root}/product/vision.md`, and the capability map is the set of `{state-root}/capabilities/{slug}/README.md`. ## STOP — how this skill works Before producing a roadmap you MUST, in order: 1. CHECK INPUTS. Read `product/strategy.md` — it must exist and be `status: approved` (the strategy itself transitively requires an approved vision). Read the capability map — the set of `capabilities/{slug}/README.md`. If there is no approved strategy, or no capability map — STOP. The roadmap sequences value slices across capabilities to serve the strategy; without both it has nothing to sequence and no criterion to sequence by. Run `product-strategy` / `capability-map` first. 2. AUTHOR the roadmap top-down (see "Authoring the roadmap"). Do NOT read the `changes/` folders to assemble it. 3. If a roadmap already exists, RECONCILE (see "Re-running the roadmap"). 4. PRODUCE THE PROPOSAL and SEEK HUMAN APPROVAL. Hard rules: - Authored from the strategy and capability map — never back-filled from existing changes. - Priority, dependency, and time-to-market only. No dates, quarters, or deadlines. - The roadmap is advisory. It gates nothing and rejects nothing. - An item is a value slice, not a capability. If an item is a whole capability, it has not been broken down — break it into the slices that deliver value incrementally. - De-risk before you optimize. The slice that most cheaply tests an unproven existential bet named by the strategy is sequenced first, ahead of ROI. A roadmap that ranks the bet-testing slice below feature slices, and flags it rather than fixing it, has the wrong sort key. - Commit to the order; never flag it. The roadmap decides every slice's position and states why — including enabler-pairs and close calls. An ordering flag ("promote X if…", "this may be mis-ranked") handed to the human in place of a decision is a defect. Surfacing genuine findings (no why-link, missing capability, vision gap) is still required — that is not an ordering decision. - You do not approve the roadmap yourself. Approval is an explicit human act. ## Authoring the roadmap Hold the strategy and the capability map together and decide: what should this product ship next, and in what order. Each roadmap item is one value slice. A roadmap item is a VALUE SLICE, not a capability. The single most common mistake is to make each item a whole capability and topologically sort them — that is the capability map with numbers on it, not a roadmap. A value slice (DESIGN_PRODUCT_PIPELINE.md §5.2a) is the smallest coherent increment that delivers real user value — defined by the value it delivers, not the capability it belongs to. Therefore: - a value slice may use only PART of a capability — a bare-bones version of a capability that delivers value before the full capability is built (e.g. a trade with just an entry and an exit price, before any reusable strategy engine exists); - a value slice may SPAN several capabilities — the thinnest end-to-end thing a user can feel often cuts across two or three; - a capability is almost never one roadmap item — it is usually delivered by several slices over several items. For every item you draft, apply this test: "Is this the thinnest thing that delivers user value — or have I just named a capability?" If it is a whole capability, break it down: find the minimal slice that delivers value first, make that the item, and let the rest of the capability follow as later items. Sequence the slices by value and dependency — earliest value first, by the shortest path, subject to what each slice genuinely depends on. De-risk before you optimize. Sequencing is not a pure value-÷-effort sort. The strategy (`strategy.md`) names the product's unproven bets and its time-to-market urgency. If the strategy identifies an unproven, existential bet — an assumption that, if false, invalidates the product — then the value slice that most cheaply TESTS that bet is sequenced FIRST, ahead of any ROI ranking. Its worth is not its feature value; it is information value: it tells you whether the product is real. ROI cannot see that, because ROI measures return on work, not return on knowledge. The ordering, in priority order: 1. **De-risking slices first.** The cheapest slice that tests each unproven existential bet the strategy names — earliest, by ascending cost. 2. **Then ROI** — value ÷ effort — orders the remaining slices, once the product's existence is being tested rather than assumed. 3. **Hard dependencies** constrain both: a slice never precedes what it genuinely depends on. A slice's value also includes ENABLING value. If a low-ROI slice is the enabler of a high-value slice, evaluate the pair together — do not let greedy ROI defer a high-value slice to the bottom of the roadmap merely because its enabler is expensive. Sequence the pair by the value it ultimately unlocks. Self-check: if your draft order would make you write a flag that says "the most important slice is ranked low, promote it if value should drive order" — the ordering rule is wrong, not the order. Do not ship a flag in place of the correct sequence. Fix the order so the de-risking slice leads. For each item, establish: - the value slice it delivers, and which capability/capabilities it draws on; - the strategy goal it serves — its `why-link` (tracing to a vision goal via the strategy); - its priority relative to the other items — why it matters now versus later; - its dependencies — which other roadmap items must happen first. Order the items by priority and dependency. An item that cannot be tied to a strategy goal is a finding — either the strategy is incomplete or the item should not be on the roadmap; surface it, do not invent a goal to cite. Sequence for earliest shippable value. The strategy states the product's time-to-market urgency and why; the roadmap obeys it by ordering value slices so the first shippable, market-testable slice reaches users as early as dependencies allow. This is a sequencing criterion, NOT a date — the roadmap still assigns no dates, quarters, or deadlines. "Time to market" means "shortest path to real value in real hands", not "by when". Do NOT read the `changes/` directories to build the roadmap. The roadmap is intent; the changes are execution. Authoring from execution is the back-fill bug. (Existing changes are relevant only during reconciliation — see below.) Commit to the order. Do not defer. Sequencing is this skill's job. For every slice, the roadmap decides its position and states why. The roadmap must NOT output an ordering flag — "promote this pair if…", "consider moving X earlier", "this may be mis-ranked, your call" — in place of a decision. A flag that hands an ordering judgment back to the human is the defect, not a courtesy. This applies especially to the hard calls: - **Enabler-pairs.** When a low-ROI slice enables a high-value slice, evaluate the pair by the value it ultimately unlocks (the de-risk amendment) — and then PLACE it. Decide whether the pair leads or stays, by asking what concretely depends on the high-value slice: if nothing downstream is gated on it, the pair holds its dependency-ordered position; if downstream value is gated on it, the pair moves up. Either way the roadmap states the call and the reason — it does not offer the human the fork. - **Close calls.** When two slices are near-equal, pick one, on a stated tie-breaker (dependency depth, de-risking value, smaller blast radius). A decided close call with a one-line reason is correct; a flagged one is not. The test: if a sequencing note in your draft contains the word "if" addressed to the human — "promote if", "move if", "reconsider if" — you have deferred a decision you were supposed to make. Replace the conditional with the decision and its reason. Genuine findings are different and still required: a slice tied to no vision goal, a missing capability, a vision gap — surface those for a human. The prohibition is on deferring ORDERING, which is the skill's own work, not on surfacing findings, which is not. ## What roadmap.md must contain Write to `{state-root}/product/roadmap.md`. Frontmatter: ``` --- revision: 1 status: draft approved_by: approved_on: reconciled-against: strategy.md revision N --- ``` `roadmap.md` is product-level state; its items carry why-links, the file itself does not. `reconciled-against` records the `strategy.md` revision this roadmap was authored against (and transitively the vision the strategy serves) — see "Document versioning". Body — an ORDERED list of roadmap items, sequenced by priority and dependency. Each item carries: - a short title — the value slice it delivers; - the user-facing value the slice delivers, in one line — if it cannot state one, it is not a value slice; - which capability/capabilities it draws on; - its `why-link` — the strategy goal it serves (resolvable path + goal), tracing to a vision goal via the strategy; - its priority rationale — why now versus later, in one or two lines; - its dependencies — which earlier roadmap items must happen first, or `none`; - **why here** — why this item sits at this position: whether it is a de-risking slice (and which strategy bet it tests), or ROI-ranked, or dependency-constrained. An item the skill itself believes is mis-ranked is not a valid roadmap — re-order, do not annotate. `why here` states a COMMITTED reason: a de-risking slice, an ROI rank, a dependency constraint, or a decided enabler-pair / tie-break. It never contains a conditional addressed to the human ("promote if…"). If the skill cannot commit to a position, the ordering rule is incomplete — resolve it, do not annotate it. Plus a short **reconciliation notes** section when the roadmap was re-run (see below), listing what changed and why. Plus a **Changelog** section — per DESIGN_PRODUCT_PIPELINE.md §2b (Changelog); first entry `revision 1 — — initial roadmap`. The roadmap contains NO dates, quarters, or deadlines. It contains no PRDs, no specs, no technical content — only sequenced intent. ## Re-running the roadmap The roadmap is durable state and goes stale — the strategy shifts, `capability-map` reshapes capabilities, priorities change. The roadmap is also stale by definition when its `reconciled-against` strategy revision is behind the current `strategy.md` `revision` (see "Document versioning"). `product-roadmap` is re-runnable. When a roadmap already exists, reconcile it: - Re-read the current `strategy.md` (and the vision it serves) and capability map. - For each existing roadmap item: is it still tied to a current strategy goal? Does the capability it names still exist (or was it merged/renamed by `capability-map`)? Is its priority still right? - Items whose capability was reshaped have their capability reference and `why-link` updated. Items no longer tied to a strategy goal are flagged. - During reconciliation ONLY, you may read the `changes/` folders — to see which roadmap items have already been delivered, so the re-proposed roadmap reflects what is done versus still intended. This is the one place existing changes inform the roadmap, and even here they inform RECONCILIATION, never the original authoring. Re-running produces a new proposal with a reconciliation-notes section, bumps `revision`, sets `reconciled-against` to the `strategy.md` revision used, and appends a `## Changelog` entry naming the change. It is human-approved like any roadmap. ## Approval The roadmap is approved only by an explicit human act — the same rule as the vision, the capability map, the PRD, the spec. You cannot approve it; a sub-agent cannot; vague assent does not count. 1. Present the roadmap to the user FOR REVIEW — the item order, the priority rationale, the dependencies, and any item not tied to a strategy goal. For a re-run, surface the reconciliation notes. Explicitly invite rejection or revision. 2. On unambiguous human approval, write `status: approved`, `approved_by`, `approved_on`, the current `revision`, and `reconciled-against` into the `roadmap.md` frontmatter. 3. Any later edit to an approved roadmap INVALIDATES the approval — reset to `draft`, clear the fields, seek fresh approval. On approval, before writing `status: approved`, append a `## Changelog` entry for this revision: the new `revision` number, the date, and one or two sentences on what changed and why. Bumping `revision` without the matching changelog entry is a defect — they are one act. ## How the roadmap feeds the pipeline A roadmap item is the RECOMMENDED upstream of a change. When an item's turn comes, it is the starting point handed to `idea-grill` or `change-scope` — a prioritized, vision-linked intent rather than a raw idea. The roadmap is advisory. A change may enter the pipeline WITHOUT a roadmap item — `product-roadmap` gates nothing and rejects nothing. A PRD MAY cite its roadmap item; if it does, the why-link chain extends from change to roadmap item to strategy goal to vision goal. If it does not, nothing breaks. `product-roadmap` never blocks `change-scope` and never requires a change to trace to a roadmap item. ## When this skill applies - Establishing or revising the product's roadmap — this skill. - A single feature idea ready to scope — NOT this skill; that is `idea-grill` / `change-scope`. - Decomposing the product into capabilities — NOT this skill; that is `capability-map`. - Discussion about priorities — not a trigger; answer normally. ## Precedence `strategy.md` and the capability map outrank `product-roadmap` — they are what the roadmap sequences to serve; this skill never edits them to make an item fit. (`strategy.md` in turn serves `vision.md`.) If the roadmap exposes that the strategy is incomplete or a capability is missing, that is a finding for `product-strategy` / `capability-map` and a human — surface it, do not resolve it by bending the roadmap. `product-roadmap` reads and writes no decision records. ## Document versioning Per DESIGN_PRODUCT_PIPELINE.md §2b. `roadmap.md` carries `revision` and `reconciled-against: strategy.md revision N`; if `strategy.md`'s `revision` exceeds that value, the roadmap is STALE and must be re-run (see "Re-running the roadmap").