/prioritization-advisor
Choose a prioritization framework based on stage, team context, and stakeholder needs. Use when deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, or another scoring approach.
$ npx -y skills add getcrew44/crew44 --skill prioritization-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
/prioritization-advisor
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Choose a prioritization framework based on stage, team context, and stakeholder needs. Use when deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, or another scoring approach.
SKILL.md
prioritization-advisor.SKILL.mdname: prioritization-advisor
description: Choose a prioritization framework based on stage, team context, and stakeholder needs. Use when deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, or another scoring approach.
intent: >-
Guide product managers in choosing the right prioritization framework by asking adaptive questions about product stage, team context, decision-making needs, and stakeholder dynamics. Use this to avoid "framework whiplash" (switching frameworks constantly) or applying the wrong framework (e.g., using RICE for strategic bets or ICE for data-driven decisions). Outputs a recommended framework with implementation guidance tailored to your context.
type: interactive
best_for:
- "Choosing the right prioritization framework for a team or stage"
- "Deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, and similar models"
- "Reducing debate about how to prioritize competing work"
scenarios:
- "Which prioritization framework should my startup use right now?"
- "Help me choose between RICE and value/effort for roadmap planning"
- "We keep arguing about prioritization. Recommend a framework."
Purpose
Guide product managers in choosing the right prioritization framework by asking adaptive questions about product stage, team context, decision-making needs, and stakeholder dynamics. Use this to avoid "framework whiplash" (switching frameworks constantly) or applying the wrong framework (e.g., using RICE for strategic bets or ICE for data-driven decisions). Outputs a recommended framework with implementation guidance tailored to your context.
This is not a scoring calculator—it's a decision guide that matches prioritization frameworks to your specific situation.
Key Concepts
The Prioritization Framework Landscape
Common frameworks and when to use them:
**Scoring frameworks:**
- **RICE** (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) — Data-driven, requires metrics
- **ICE** (Impact, Confidence, Ease) — Lightweight, gut-check scoring
- **Value vs. Effort** (2x2 matrix) — Quick wins vs. strategic bets
- **Weighted Scoring** — Custom criteria with stakeholder input
**Strategic frameworks:**
- **Kano Model** — Classify features by customer delight (basic, performance, delight)
- **Opportunity Scoring** — Rate importance vs. satisfaction gap
- **Buy-a-Feature** — Customer budget allocation exercise
- **Moscow** (Must, Should, Could, Won't) — Forcing function for hard choices
**Contextual frameworks:**
- **Cost of Delay** — Urgency-based (time-sensitive features)
- **Impact Mapping** — Goal-driven (tie features to outcomes)
- **Story Mapping** — User journey-based (narrative flow)
Why This Works
- **Context-aware:** Matches framework to product stage, team maturity, data availability
- **Anti-dogmatic:** No single "best" framework—it depends on your situation
- **Actionable:** Provides implementation steps, not just framework names
Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)
- **Not a universal ranking:** Frameworks aren't "better" or "worse"—they fit different contexts
- **Not a replacement for strategy:** Frameworks execute strategy; they don't create it
- **Not set-it-and-forget-it:** Reassess frameworks as your product matures
When to Use This
- Choosing a prioritization framework for the first time
- Switching frameworks (current one isn't working)
- Aligning stakeholders on prioritization process
- Onboarding new PMs to team practices
When NOT to Use This
- When you already have a working framework (don't fix what isn't broken)
- For one-off decisions (frameworks are for recurring prioritization)
- As a substitute for strategic vision (frameworks can't tell you what to build)
---
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
This interactive skill asks **up to 4 adaptive questions**, offering **3-4 enumerated options** at each step.
---
Question 1: Product Stage
**Agent asks:** "What stage is your product in?"
**Offer 4 enumerated options:**
1. **Pre-product/market fit** — "Searching for PMF; experimenting rapidly; unclear what customers want" (High uncertainty, need speed) 2. **Early PMF, scaling** — "Found initial PMF; growing fast; adding features to retain/expand" (Moderate uncertainty, balancing speed + quality) 3. **Mature product, optimization** — "Established market; incremental improvements; competing on quality/features" (Low uncertainty, data-driven decisions) 4. **Multiple products/platform** — "Portfolio of products; cross-product dependencies; complex stakeholder needs" (Coordination complexity)
**Or describe your product stage (new idea, growth mode, established, etc.).**
**User response:** [Selection or custom]
---
Question 2: Team Context
**Agent asks:** "What's your team and stakeholder environment like?"
**Offer 4 enumerated options:**
1. **Small team, limited resources** — "3-5 engineers, 1 PM, need to focus ruthlessly" (Need simple, fast framework) 2. **Cross-functional team, aligned** — "Product, design, engineering aligned; clear goals; good collaboration" (Can use data-driven frameworks) 3. **Multiple stakeholders, misaligned** — "Execs, sales, customers all have opinions; need transparent process" (Need consensus-building framework) 4. **Large org, complex dependencies** — "Multiple teams, shared roadmap, cross-team dependencies" (Need coordination framework)
**Or describe your team/stakeholder cont
Read more
name: prioritization-advisor description: Choose a prioritization framework based on stage, team context, and stakeholder needs. Use when deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, or another scoring approach. intent: >- Guide product managers in choosing the right prioritization framework by asking adaptive questions about product stage, team context, decision-making needs, and stakeholder dynamics. Use this to avoid "framework whiplash" (switching frameworks constantly) or applying the wrong framework (e.g., using RICE for strategic bets or ICE for data-driven decisions). Outputs a recommended framework with implementation guidance tailored to your context. type: interactive best_for: - "Choosing the right prioritization framework for a team or stage" - "Deciding between RICE, ICE, value/effort, and similar models" - "Reducing debate about how to prioritize competing work" scenarios: - "Which prioritization framework should my startup use right now?" - "Help me choose between RICE and value/effort for roadmap planning" - "We keep arguing about prioritization. Recommend a framework."
Purpose
Guide product managers in choosing the right prioritization framework by asking adaptive questions about product stage, team context, decision-making needs, and stakeholder dynamics. Use this to avoid "framework whiplash" (switching frameworks constantly) or applying the wrong framework (e.g., using RICE for strategic bets or ICE for data-driven decisions). Outputs a recommended framework with implementation guidance tailored to your context.
This is not a scoring calculator—it's a decision guide that matches prioritization frameworks to your specific situation.
Key Concepts
The Prioritization Framework Landscape
Common frameworks and when to use them:
**Scoring frameworks:**
- **RICE** (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) — Data-driven, requires metrics
- **ICE** (Impact, Confidence, Ease) — Lightweight, gut-check scoring
- **Value vs. Effort** (2x2 matrix) — Quick wins vs. strategic bets
- **Weighted Scoring** — Custom criteria with stakeholder input
**Strategic frameworks:**
- **Kano Model** — Classify features by customer delight (basic, performance, delight)
- **Opportunity Scoring** — Rate importance vs. satisfaction gap
- **Buy-a-Feature** — Customer budget allocation exercise
- **Moscow** (Must, Should, Could, Won't) — Forcing function for hard choices
**Contextual frameworks:**
- **Cost of Delay** — Urgency-based (time-sensitive features)
- **Impact Mapping** — Goal-driven (tie features to outcomes)
- **Story Mapping** — User journey-based (narrative flow)
Why This Works
- **Context-aware:** Matches framework to product stage, team maturity, data availability
- **Anti-dogmatic:** No single "best" framework—it depends on your situation
- **Actionable:** Provides implementation steps, not just framework names
Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)
- **Not a universal ranking:** Frameworks aren't "better" or "worse"—they fit different contexts
- **Not a replacement for strategy:** Frameworks execute strategy; they don't create it
- **Not set-it-and-forget-it:** Reassess frameworks as your product matures
When to Use This
- Choosing a prioritization framework for the first time
- Switching frameworks (current one isn't working)
- Aligning stakeholders on prioritization process
- Onboarding new PMs to team practices
When NOT to Use This
- When you already have a working framework (don't fix what isn't broken)
- For one-off decisions (frameworks are for recurring prioritization)
- As a substitute for strategic vision (frameworks can't tell you what to build)
---
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
This interactive skill asks **up to 4 adaptive questions**, offering **3-4 enumerated options** at each step.
---
Question 1: Product Stage
**Agent asks:** "What stage is your product in?"
**Offer 4 enumerated options:**
1. **Pre-product/market fit** — "Searching for PMF; experimenting rapidly; unclear what customers want" (High uncertainty, need speed) 2. **Early PMF, scaling** — "Found initial PMF; growing fast; adding features to retain/expand" (Moderate uncertainty, balancing speed + quality) 3. **Mature product, optimization** — "Established market; incremental improvements; competing on quality/features" (Low uncertainty, data-driven decisions) 4. **Multiple products/platform** — "Portfolio of products; cross-product dependencies; complex stakeholder needs" (Coordination complexity)
**Or describe your product stage (new idea, growth mode, established, etc.).**
**User response:** [Selection or custom]
---
Question 2: Team Context
**Agent asks:** "What's your team and stakeholder environment like?"
**Offer 4 enumerated options:**
1. **Small team, limited resources** — "3-5 engineers, 1 PM, need to focus ruthlessly" (Need simple, fast framework) 2. **Cross-functional team, aligned** — "Product, design, engineering aligned; clear goals; good collaboration" (Can use data-driven frameworks) 3. **Multiple stakeholders, misaligned** — "Execs, sales, customers all have opinions; need transparent process" (Need consensus-building framework) 4. **Large org, complex dependencies** — "Multiple teams, shared roadmap, cross-team dependencies" (Need coordination framework)
**Or describe your team/stakeholder cont
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

