Skip to content
Development
Skill

/nw-roadmap-design

Roadmap concision rules, step decomposition efficiency, AC abstraction guidelines, and step-to-scenario mapping. Load when creating implementation roadmaps.

From plugin
nwave
591200 skills34 agents27 commands
Install
$ npx -y skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-roadmap-design --agent claude-code

How 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/nw-roadmap-design

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

Roadmap concision rules, step decomposition efficiency, AC abstraction guidelines, and step-to-scenario mapping. Load when creating implementation roadmaps.

SKILL.md

nw-roadmap-design.SKILL.md
name: nw-roadmap-design
description: Roadmap concision rules, step decomposition efficiency, AC abstraction guidelines, and step-to-scenario mapping. Load when creating implementation roadmaps.
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: true

Roadmap Design

Roadmap Principles

When this skill is loaded, these principles activate in addition to the agent's core principles:

1. **Measure before planning**: Never create roadmap without quantitative baseline. Require timing breakdowns|impact rankings|target validation. Halt and request data when missing. 2. **Concise roadmaps**: Step descriptions max 50 words, AC max 5 per step at max 30 words each. Bullets over prose. Assume expertise. Eliminate qualifiers/motivational text. Token efficiency compounds -- crafter reads roadmap ~35 times. 3. **Paradigm-aware roadmap strategy**: When functional paradigm selected, adapt roadmap for FP: types-first (algebraic data types before implementation)|composition pipelines|pure core/effect shell|effect boundaries instead of port interfaces. Strategic guidance only -- no code snippets/function signatures.

Roadmap Critical Rules

1. Never include implementation code in roadmaps. You design; software-crafter writes code. 2. Never create roadmaps without quantitative data. Halt and request measurement data when missing. 3. Roadmap steps with identical patterns (differing by substitution variable) must batch into single step. 3+ identical-pattern steps = batching opportunity.

Quality Gate (DELIVER only)

  • [ ] Roadmap step count efficient (steps/production-files <= 2.5)

Canonical Format

Use ONLY compact nested format. See `nWave/templates/roadmap-schema.json` for fields/validation. Structure: `roadmap` metadata, `phases` with nested `steps`, `implementation_scope`, `validation`. Phase IDs: two digits (`"01"`). Step IDs: `"NN-MM"`.

Concision Requirements

Token efficiency: crafter reads roadmap ~35 times (7 phases x 5 steps). 5000-token x 35 = 175k tokens. 1000-token x 35 = 35k (80% savings).

Quantitative Limits

  • Step description: max 50 words | AC per step: max 5 | Each AC: max 30 words
  • Step notes: max 100 words
  • Target: small (1-3 steps) = 500, medium (4-8) = 1500, large (9-15) = 3000 tokens

Include

WHAT to build (one sentence) | WHY (brief business value) | Observable outcomes (testable AC) | Architectural constraints | Integration points

Exclude

HOW to implement | code snippets/class names | algorithm descriptions | step-by-step instructions | tech tutorials | testing strategy (TDD standard) | motivational language | redundancy | examples when description clear

Compression Techniques

Bullets over prose | eliminate qualifiers | assume expertise | active voice | omit obvious

Acceptance Criteria Abstraction

AC describe observable outcomes, never internal implementation.

Rules

Describe WHAT (behavior) not HOW (implementation) | Never reference private methods (underscore prefix) | Never reference internal class decomposition | Never prescribe signatures/params/return types | Crafter decides structure during GREEN + REFACTOR

Good AC Examples

  • "DES module importable from installation target after install"
  • "DES utility scripts present and executable in scripts directory"
  • "Installation uses backup before overwriting existing components"

Bad AC Examples (implementation-coupled)

  • "_install_des_module() copies src/des/ to ~/.claude/lib/python/des/"
  • "verify() checks DES module importable via subprocess test"
  • "context.installation_verifier._check_agents() called for verification"

Step Decomposition Efficiency

Step Ratio Check

Rule: `steps_count / estimated_production_files <= 2.5` Violation = over-decomposition. Action: merge steps targeting same file.

Identical Pattern Detection

Rule: if N steps differ only by substitution variable, batch into 1 step. Threshold: 3+ identical-pattern steps must batch. Bad: 4 separate steps for AgentsPlugin, CommandsPlugin, TemplatesPlugin, UtilitiesPlugin Good: 1 step creating all 4

No-Op Prevention

Each step must add production code. Validation-only steps are not steps. Bad: "Step 02-05: Validate extraction with integration tests" Good: validation is part of preceding step's REVIEW phase

Step-to-Scenario Mapping

For roadmaps feeding DELIVER wave: 1. Read acceptance tests (tests/acceptance/test_*.py) before creating roadmap 2. Count scenarios (def test_*) | 3. ~1 step per scenario (flexibility for infra steps) 4. Mark infra steps: "type: infrastructure" | 5. Principle: 1 Scenario = 1 Step = 1 TDD Cycle

For each step mapped to a distilled acceptance scenario, populate:

  • `test_file`: relative path to the test file (e.g., `tests/acceptance/test_auth.py`)
  • `scenario_name`: the scenario/test function name (e.g., `test_login_with_valid_credentials`)

These fields enable the crafter to locate and unskip the exact pre-existing test during RED (3-phase canon per ADR-025; legacy logs record the same activation under the RED_ACCEPTANCE sub-step). If DISTILL was skipped, leave these fields empty — the crafter will write new tests.

Measure Before Plan Gate

Before any roadmap, verify: 1. Timing data shows WHERE time spent | 2. Impact ranking shows MOST contributing component | 3. Target validation provides evidence

Missing data: halt, request measurement, offer to help. Gate is blocking.

Simplest Solution Gate

Before multi-phase (>3 steps), document rejected alternatives:

Alternatives to Consider

1. Configuration-only (no code) | 2. Single-file change | 3. Existing tool/library | 4. Partial (solve 80% simply)

Documentation Format

## Rejected Simple Alternatives

### Alternative 1: {simplest approach}
- What: {description}
- Expected Impact: {% of problem solved}
- Why Insufficient: {evidence-based reason}

### Why Complex Solution Necessary
1. Simple alternatives fail due to: {specific reason with evidence}
2. Complexity justified by: {benefit simple s
Read more
Ships withnwave

AI agents that guide you from idea to working code, with human judgment at every gate. nWave runs inside Claude Code. It breaks feature delivery into seven waves (discover, diverge, discuss, design, devops, distill, deliver).

Get the whole plugin