Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Jeff Patton-style user story mapping for visualizing user journeys, MVP definition, release planning, backlog sequencing, and cross-team alignment.
.claude/skills/borghei-story-mapping/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -43% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 26% | 0% |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 23% | 0% |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 64% | 0% |
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 34% | 0% |
Visualize the user journey and translate strategy into prioritized, deliverable work using Jeff Patton's user story mapping technique. Story maps shift teams from feature-first thinking to flow-first thinking -- understanding the complete user experience before deciding what to build and in what order.
A story map is a 2D grid: the backbone (activities → steps) runs left-to-right in the order users experience the journey, the body (tasks) hangs below each step ranked top-to-bottom by priority, and a horizontal MVP line separates Release 1 from later. See the playbook reference for full anatomy and the 6-step build sequence.
Before building the map, confirm these inputs. If any is unknown or vague, ASK — do not assume:
Stop rule: ask only the 2-3 that most change the output. If the user says "just draft it," proceed and list your assumptions at the top of the artifact.
In Scope: User story map creation, backbone and body decomposition, release slice definition, MVP scoping, facilitation guidance, workshop planning, template and pattern library.
Out of Scope: Individual story writing and acceptance criteria (see job-stories/ or agile-product-owner), technical architecture decisions, detailed effort estimation, sprint planning mechanics.
Important Caveats: Story maps are planning tools, not contracts. They should be updated as the team learns. A map created before building will always be wrong in details -- the value is in the shared understanding, not the artifact itself. Jeff Patton: "The map is not the territory; the conversation is the territory."
| Integration | Direction | What Flows | |---|---|---| | job-stories/ | Receives from | JTBD discovery canvas defines the narrative for mapping | | create-prd/ | Feeds into | Release 1 tasks inform PRD scope (Sections 7 and 8) | | prioritization-frameworks/ | Complements | RICE scoring prioritizes within release slices | | brainstorm-okrs/ | Complements | Release slices align with quarterly OKR targets | | outcome-roadmap/ | Feeds into | Release slices map to Now/Next/Later roadmap horizons | | wwas/ | Feeds into | Tasks become WWAS backlog items with strategic context |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-05 | pass→pass | 12,316 | 13,455 | +9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,920 | 2,955 | +54% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 20,844 | 9,217 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,010 | 2,284 | -43% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 17,464 | 22,520 | +29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,899 | 4,653 | +61% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 14,283 | 19,579 | +37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,365 | 4,029 | +70% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 26,900 | 21,361 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,216 | 4,715 | +12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 17,519 | 15,159 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,660 | 3,360 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 11,153 | 10,715 | -4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,743 | 2,492 | +43% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | pass→pass | 15,458 | 16,515 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,356 | 3,347 | +42% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 14,986 | 17,221 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,368 | 4,071 | +72% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | 18,369 | 7,792 | -58% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,010 | 2,130 | -29% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 8,183 | 5,820 | -29% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,230 | 1,790 | +46% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 17,698 | 15,971 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,689 | 3,308 | +23% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 15,138 | 13,608 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,400 | 2,980 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 16,097 | 16,622 | +3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,442 | 3,516 | +44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 17,143 | 13,511 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,505 | 3,100 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | pass→pass | 7,511 | 9,286 | +24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,160 | 2,347 | +102% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 5,923 | 4,540 | -23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 832 | 1,633 | +96% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 13,110 | 7,377 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,860 | 1,985 | +7% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→pass | 16,095 | 13,579 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,178 | 2,792 | +28% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 12,813 | 11,303 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,869 | 2,565 | +37% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 8,958 | 8,853 | -1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,356 | 2,218 | +64% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | 18,952 | 18,468 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,757 | 3,706 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +23 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.