/epic-breakdown-advisor
Break down epics into user stories with Humanizing Work split patterns. Use when a backlog item is too large to estimate, sequence, or deliver safely.
$ npx -y skills add getcrew44/crew44 --skill epic-breakdown-advisor --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/epic-breakdown-advisor
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Break down epics into user stories with Humanizing Work split patterns. Use when a backlog item is too large to estimate, sequence, or deliver safely.
SKILL.md
epic-breakdown-advisor.SKILL.mdname: epic-breakdown-advisor
description: Break down epics into user stories with Humanizing Work split patterns. Use when a backlog item is too large to estimate, sequence, or deliver safely.
intent: >-
Guide product managers through breaking down epics into user stories using Richard Lawrence's complete Humanizing Work methodology—a systematic, flowchart-driven approach that applies 9 splitting patterns sequentially. Use this to identify which pattern applies, split while preserving user value, and evaluate splits based on what they reveal about low-value work you can eliminate. This ensures vertical slicing (end-to-end value) rather than horizontal slicing (technical layers).
type: interactive
best_for:
- "Splitting epics into smaller vertical slices"
- "Choosing the right story split pattern for a large backlog item"
- "Turning vague feature blobs into sprint-sized stories"
scenarios:
- "Break this onboarding epic into smaller user stories"
- "Help me split a large reporting feature before sprint planning"
- "Which story-splitting pattern should I use for this admin workflow epic?"
Purpose
Guide product managers through breaking down epics into user stories using Richard Lawrence's complete Humanizing Work methodology—a systematic, flowchart-driven approach that applies 9 splitting patterns sequentially. Use this to identify which pattern applies, split while preserving user value, and evaluate splits based on what they reveal about low-value work you can eliminate. This ensures vertical slicing (end-to-end value) rather than horizontal slicing (technical layers).
This is not arbitrary slicing—it's a proven, methodical process that starts with validation, walks through patterns in order, and evaluates results strategically.
Key Concepts
Core Principles: Vertical Slices Preserve Value
A user story is "a description of a change in system behavior from the perspective of a user." Splitting must maintain **vertical slices**—work that touches multiple architectural layers and delivers observable user value—not horizontal slices addressing single components (e.g., "front-end story" + "back-end story").
The Three-Step Process
1. **Pre-Split Validation:** Check if story satisfies INVEST criteria (except "Small") 2. **Apply Splitting Patterns:** Work through 9 patterns sequentially until one fits 3. **Evaluate Splits:** Choose the split that reveals low-value work or produces equal-sized stories
The 9 Splitting Patterns (In Order)
1. **Workflow Steps** — Thin end-to-end slices, not step-by-step 2. **Operations (CRUD)** — Create, Read, Update, Delete as separate stories 3. **Business Rule Variations** — Different rules = different stories 4. **Data Variations** — Different data types/structures 5. **Data Entry Methods** — Simple UI first, fancy UI later 6. **Major Effort** — "Implement one + add remaining" 7. **Simple/Complex** — Core simplest version first, variations later 8. **Defer Performance** — "Make it work" before "make it fast" 9. **Break Out a Spike** — Time-box investigation when uncertainty blocks splitting
Meta-Pattern (Applies Across All Patterns)
1. Identify the core complexity 2. List all variations 3. Reduce variations to **one complete slice** 4. Make other variations separate stories
Why This Works
- **Prevents arbitrary splitting:** Methodical checklist prevents guessing
- **Preserves user value:** Every story delivers observable value
- **Reveals waste:** Good splits expose low-value work you can deprioritize
- **Repeatable:** Apply to any epic consistently
---
Facilitation Source of Truth
Use [`workshop-facilitation`](../workshop-facilitation/SKILL.md) as the default interaction protocol for this skill.
It defines:
- session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
- one-question turns with plain-language prompts
- progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
- interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
- numbered recommendations at decision points
- quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include `Other (specify)` when useful)
This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
Application
Step 0: Provide Epic Context
**Agent asks:**
Please share your epic:
- Epic title/ID
- Description or hypothesis
- Acceptance criteria (especially multiple "When/Then" pairs)
- Target persona
- Rough estimate
**You can paste from Jira, Linear, or describe briefly.**
---
Step 1: Pre-Split Validation (INVEST Check)
**Before splitting, verify your story satisfies INVEST criteria (except "Small"):**
**Agent asks questions sequentially:**
**1. Independent?** "Can this story be prioritized and developed without hard technical dependencies on other stories?"
**Options:**
- Yes — No blocking dependencies
- No — Requires other work first (flag this)
---
**2. Negotiable?** "Does this story leave room for the team to discover implementation details collaboratively, rather than prescribing exact solutions?"
**Options:**
- Yes — It's a conversation starter, not a spec
- No — It's too prescriptive (may need reframing)
---
**3. Valuable?** "Does this story deliver observable value to a user? (If not, combine it with related work rather than splitting.)"
**Options:**
- Yes — Users see/experience something different
- No — It's a technical task (not a user story—don't split, reframe)
**⚠️ Critical Check:** If story fails "Valuable," STOP. Don't split. Instead, combine with other work to create a meaningful increment.
---
**4. Estimable?** "Can your team size this story relatively (even if roughly)?"
**Options:**
- Yes — Team can estimate days/points
- No — Too much uncertainty (may need spike first)
---
**5. Testable?** "Does this story have concrete acceptance criteria that QA can verify?"
**Options:**
- Yes — Clear pass/fail conditions
- No — Needs clearer acceptance criteria (re
Read more
name: epic-breakdown-advisor description: Break down epics into user stories with Humanizing Work split patterns. Use when a backlog item is too large to estimate, sequence, or deliver safely. intent: >- Guide product managers through breaking down epics into user stories using Richard Lawrence's complete Humanizing Work methodology—a systematic, flowchart-driven approach that applies 9 splitting patterns sequentially. Use this to identify which pattern applies, split while preserving user value, and evaluate splits based on what they reveal about low-value work you can eliminate. This ensures vertical slicing (end-to-end value) rather than horizontal slicing (technical layers). type: interactive best_for: - "Splitting epics into smaller vertical slices" - "Choosing the right story split pattern for a large backlog item" - "Turning vague feature blobs into sprint-sized stories" scenarios: - "Break this onboarding epic into smaller user stories" - "Help me split a large reporting feature before sprint planning" - "Which story-splitting pattern should I use for this admin workflow epic?"
Purpose
Guide product managers through breaking down epics into user stories using Richard Lawrence's complete Humanizing Work methodology—a systematic, flowchart-driven approach that applies 9 splitting patterns sequentially. Use this to identify which pattern applies, split while preserving user value, and evaluate splits based on what they reveal about low-value work you can eliminate. This ensures vertical slicing (end-to-end value) rather than horizontal slicing (technical layers).
This is not arbitrary slicing—it's a proven, methodical process that starts with validation, walks through patterns in order, and evaluates results strategically.
Key Concepts
Core Principles: Vertical Slices Preserve Value
A user story is "a description of a change in system behavior from the perspective of a user." Splitting must maintain **vertical slices**—work that touches multiple architectural layers and delivers observable user value—not horizontal slices addressing single components (e.g., "front-end story" + "back-end story").
The Three-Step Process
1. **Pre-Split Validation:** Check if story satisfies INVEST criteria (except "Small") 2. **Apply Splitting Patterns:** Work through 9 patterns sequentially until one fits 3. **Evaluate Splits:** Choose the split that reveals low-value work or produces equal-sized stories
The 9 Splitting Patterns (In Order)
1. **Workflow Steps** — Thin end-to-end slices, not step-by-step 2. **Operations (CRUD)** — Create, Read, Update, Delete as separate stories 3. **Business Rule Variations** — Different rules = different stories 4. **Data Variations** — Different data types/structures 5. **Data Entry Methods** — Simple UI first, fancy UI later 6. **Major Effort** — "Implement one + add remaining" 7. **Simple/Complex** — Core simplest version first, variations later 8. **Defer Performance** — "Make it work" before "make it fast" 9. **Break Out a Spike** — Time-box investigation when uncertainty blocks splitting
Meta-Pattern (Applies Across All Patterns)
1. Identify the core complexity 2. List all variations 3. Reduce variations to **one complete slice** 4. Make other variations separate stories
Why This Works
- **Prevents arbitrary splitting:** Methodical checklist prevents guessing
- **Preserves user value:** Every story delivers observable value
- **Reveals waste:** Good splits expose low-value work you can deprioritize
- **Repeatable:** Apply to any epic consistently
---
Facilitation Source of Truth
Use [`workshop-facilitation`](../workshop-facilitation/SKILL.md) as the default interaction protocol for this skill.
It defines:
- session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
- one-question turns with plain-language prompts
- progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
- interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
- numbered recommendations at decision points
- quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include `Other (specify)` when useful)
This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
Application
Step 0: Provide Epic Context
**Agent asks:**
Please share your epic:
- Epic title/ID
- Description or hypothesis
- Acceptance criteria (especially multiple "When/Then" pairs)
- Target persona
- Rough estimate
**You can paste from Jira, Linear, or describe briefly.**
---
Step 1: Pre-Split Validation (INVEST Check)
**Before splitting, verify your story satisfies INVEST criteria (except "Small"):**
**Agent asks questions sequentially:**
**1. Independent?** "Can this story be prioritized and developed without hard technical dependencies on other stories?"
**Options:**
- Yes — No blocking dependencies
- No — Requires other work first (flag this)
---
**2. Negotiable?** "Does this story leave room for the team to discover implementation details collaboratively, rather than prescribing exact solutions?"
**Options:**
- Yes — It's a conversation starter, not a spec
- No — It's too prescriptive (may need reframing)
---
**3. Valuable?** "Does this story deliver observable value to a user? (If not, combine it with related work rather than splitting.)"
**Options:**
- Yes — Users see/experience something different
- No — It's a technical task (not a user story—don't split, reframe)
**⚠️ Critical Check:** If story fails "Valuable," STOP. Don't split. Instead, combine with other work to create a meaningful increment.
---
**4. Estimable?** "Can your team size this story relatively (even if roughly)?"
**Options:**
- Yes — Team can estimate days/points
- No — Too much uncertainty (may need spike first)
---
**5. Testable?** "Does this story have concrete acceptance criteria that QA can verify?"
**Options:**
- Yes — Clear pass/fail conditions
- No — Needs clearer acceptance criteria (re
Orchestrate a crew of specialist AI agents in one local-first workspace. Each role on its best model, with memory and skills that compound. Free, MIT.
Repo: getcrew44/crew44
Other skills on crew44.
- /brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
Open skill - /executing-plans
Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
Open skill - /finishing-a-development-branch
Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work - guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup
Open skill - /receiving-code-review
Use when receiving code review feedback, before implementing suggestions, especially if feedback seems unclear or technically questionable - requires technical rigor and verification, not performative agreement or blind implementation
Open skill - /requesting-code-review
Use when completing tasks, implementing major features, or before merging to verify work meets requirements
Open skill - /systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes
Open skill

