/nw-user-story-mapping
User story mapping for backlog management and outcome-based prioritization. Load during Phase 2.5 (User Story Mapping) to produce story-map.md and prioritization.md.
$ npx -y skills add nWave-ai/nWave --skill nw-user-story-mapping --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
/nw-user-story-mapping
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
User story mapping for backlog management and outcome-based prioritization. Load during Phase 2.5 (User Story Mapping) to produce story-map.md and prioritization.md.
SKILL.md
nw-user-story-mapping.SKILL.mdname: nw-user-story-mapping
description: User story mapping for backlog management and outcome-based prioritization. Load during Phase 2.5 (User Story Mapping) to produce story-map.md and prioritization.md.
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: true
User Story Mapping
Create story maps that organize user stories spatially by activity and priority, then slice releases by outcome impact. Reference: Jeff Patton, "User Story Mapping" (2014). Integrates outcome-based prioritization from Gothelf/Seiden and riskiest-assumption-first from Maurya.
Story Map Anatomy
| Element | Position | Purpose | |---------|----------|---------| | **Backbone** | Top row, left-to-right | User activities in chronological order -- the spine of the journey | | **Ribs** | Columns under each activity | User tasks broken down vertically by detail and priority | | **Walking Skeleton** | Horizontal line across all activities | Thinnest possible end-to-end working flow. Not an MVP -- it is the minimum slice that connects ALL activities | | **Release Slices** | Horizontal bands below skeleton | Coherent groups of stories, each adding incremental value tied to a specific outcome |
Visual structure:
Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Task A.1 Task B.1 Task C.1 Task D.1 <- Walking Skeleton
........... ........... ........... ........... <- skeleton line
Task A.2 Task B.2 Task C.2 Task D.2 <- Release 1
Task A.3 Task B.3 <- Release 1
Task B.4 Task C.3 Task D.3 <- Release 2Building the Map
Step 1: Frame the journey
Identify the user persona and their end-to-end goal. One map per persona-goal pair.
Step 2: Map the backbone
Write the big activities left-to-right in chronological order. These are verb phrases: "Search products", "Compare options", "Complete purchase". Aim for 4-8 activities.
Step 3: Fill the ribs
Under each activity, list the tasks that support it. Write as short action phrases (user behaviors). Place more detail and less critical tasks lower.
Step 4: Prioritize vertically
Reorder tasks within each column: most critical at top, nice-to-have at bottom. Ask: "Which task is essential for this activity to work at all?"
Step 5: Draw the walking skeleton
Draw a horizontal line that captures exactly one task from each activity -- the thinnest slice that delivers end-to-end flow. Every activity must be represented. If an activity has no task above the line, the skeleton is incomplete.
Step 6: Slice into releases by outcome
Group remaining tasks into horizontal bands. Each band targets a specific outcome KPI. Name each release by the outcome it achieves, not the features it contains.
Outcome-Based Prioritization
Prioritize releases by outcome impact, not feature completeness. Each release slice targets a specific measurable behavior change.
Prioritization Formula
**Value** (outcome impact) x **Urgency** (time-sensitivity) / **Effort** (complexity) = **Priority Score**
Where (1-5 scale):
- **Value** (1-5) = outcome impact. 5 = moves north-star KPI significantly. 1 = marginal improvement. In Phase 2.5, estimate from discovery insights; refine in Phase 4 after outcome-kpis.md exists.
- **Urgency** (1-5) = time-sensitivity. 5 = time-critical or derisks fatal assumption. 1 = evergreen, no deadline.
- **Effort** (1-5) = complexity. 5 = many tasks, cross-cutting, unknowns. 1 = single task, well-understood.
- **Tie-breaking**: Walking Skeleton > Riskiest Assumption > Highest Value.
Riskiest Assumption First
From Running Lean (Maurya): validate what could kill the product before optimizing what improves it.
| Priority | What to validate | Why | |----------|-----------------|-----| | 1st | Walking skeleton | Does the end-to-end flow work at all? | | 2nd | Release targeting riskiest assumption | Could this assumption kill the product? | | 3rd | Release targeting highest-value outcome | Which behavior change drives the most impact? | | 4th+ | Remaining releases by Value x Urgency / Effort | Incremental value delivery |
Connecting to Outcomes
Each release slice maps to the logic model chain (Gothelf/Seiden):
Release Slice -> Output (features built)
-> Outcome (behavior change: [Who] [Does what] [By how much])
-> Impact (business KPI moved)Story Map Template (story-map.md)
# Story Map: {feature-name}
## User: {persona}
## Goal: {what they're trying to accomplish}
## Backbone
| Activity 1 | Activity 2 | Activity 3 | Activity N |
|------------|------------|------------|------------|
| Task 1.1 | Task 2.1 | Task 3.1 | Task N.1 |
| Task 1.2 | Task 2.2 | Task 3.2 | |
| | Task 2.3 | | |
---
### Walking Skeleton
{List the minimum tasks from each activity that form the thinnest end-to-end slice}
### Release 1: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}
### Release 2: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}Prioritization Template (prioritization.md)
# Prioritization: {feature-name}
## Release Priority
| Priority | Release | Target Outcome | KPI | Rationale |
|----------|---------|---------------|-----|-----------|
| 1 | Walking Skeleton | End-to-end flow works | {KPI} | Validates core assumption |
| 2 | {name} | {outcome} | {KPI} | {why this order} |
## Backlog Suggestions
| Story | Release | Priority | Outcome Link | Dependencies |
|-------|---------|----------|-------------|--------------|
| US-01 | WS | P1 | {KPI-1} | None |
| US-02 | R1 | P2 | {KPI-2} | US-01 |
> **Note**: In Phase 2.5, stories are task-level placeholders (e.g., "Search by category").
> Story IDs (US-01) are assigned in Phase 4 (Requirements). Revisit this table after Phase 4.Anti-Patterns
| Anti
Read more
name: nw-user-story-mapping description: User story mapping for backlog management and outcome-based prioritization. Load during Phase 2.5 (User Story Mapping) to produce story-map.md and prioritization.md. user-invocable: false disable-model-invocation: true
User Story Mapping
Create story maps that organize user stories spatially by activity and priority, then slice releases by outcome impact. Reference: Jeff Patton, "User Story Mapping" (2014). Integrates outcome-based prioritization from Gothelf/Seiden and riskiest-assumption-first from Maurya.
Story Map Anatomy
| Element | Position | Purpose | |---------|----------|---------| | **Backbone** | Top row, left-to-right | User activities in chronological order -- the spine of the journey | | **Ribs** | Columns under each activity | User tasks broken down vertically by detail and priority | | **Walking Skeleton** | Horizontal line across all activities | Thinnest possible end-to-end working flow. Not an MVP -- it is the minimum slice that connects ALL activities | | **Release Slices** | Horizontal bands below skeleton | Coherent groups of stories, each adding incremental value tied to a specific outcome |
Visual structure:
Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Task A.1 Task B.1 Task C.1 Task D.1 <- Walking Skeleton
........... ........... ........... ........... <- skeleton line
Task A.2 Task B.2 Task C.2 Task D.2 <- Release 1
Task A.3 Task B.3 <- Release 1
Task B.4 Task C.3 Task D.3 <- Release 2Building the Map
Step 1: Frame the journey
Identify the user persona and their end-to-end goal. One map per persona-goal pair.
Step 2: Map the backbone
Write the big activities left-to-right in chronological order. These are verb phrases: "Search products", "Compare options", "Complete purchase". Aim for 4-8 activities.
Step 3: Fill the ribs
Under each activity, list the tasks that support it. Write as short action phrases (user behaviors). Place more detail and less critical tasks lower.
Step 4: Prioritize vertically
Reorder tasks within each column: most critical at top, nice-to-have at bottom. Ask: "Which task is essential for this activity to work at all?"
Step 5: Draw the walking skeleton
Draw a horizontal line that captures exactly one task from each activity -- the thinnest slice that delivers end-to-end flow. Every activity must be represented. If an activity has no task above the line, the skeleton is incomplete.
Step 6: Slice into releases by outcome
Group remaining tasks into horizontal bands. Each band targets a specific outcome KPI. Name each release by the outcome it achieves, not the features it contains.
Outcome-Based Prioritization
Prioritize releases by outcome impact, not feature completeness. Each release slice targets a specific measurable behavior change.
Prioritization Formula
**Value** (outcome impact) x **Urgency** (time-sensitivity) / **Effort** (complexity) = **Priority Score**
Where (1-5 scale):
- **Value** (1-5) = outcome impact. 5 = moves north-star KPI significantly. 1 = marginal improvement. In Phase 2.5, estimate from discovery insights; refine in Phase 4 after outcome-kpis.md exists.
- **Urgency** (1-5) = time-sensitivity. 5 = time-critical or derisks fatal assumption. 1 = evergreen, no deadline.
- **Effort** (1-5) = complexity. 5 = many tasks, cross-cutting, unknowns. 1 = single task, well-understood.
- **Tie-breaking**: Walking Skeleton > Riskiest Assumption > Highest Value.
Riskiest Assumption First
From Running Lean (Maurya): validate what could kill the product before optimizing what improves it.
| Priority | What to validate | Why | |----------|-----------------|-----| | 1st | Walking skeleton | Does the end-to-end flow work at all? | | 2nd | Release targeting riskiest assumption | Could this assumption kill the product? | | 3rd | Release targeting highest-value outcome | Which behavior change drives the most impact? | | 4th+ | Remaining releases by Value x Urgency / Effort | Incremental value delivery |
Connecting to Outcomes
Each release slice maps to the logic model chain (Gothelf/Seiden):
Release Slice -> Output (features built)
-> Outcome (behavior change: [Who] [Does what] [By how much])
-> Impact (business KPI moved)Story Map Template (story-map.md)
# Story Map: {feature-name}
## User: {persona}
## Goal: {what they're trying to accomplish}
## Backbone
| Activity 1 | Activity 2 | Activity 3 | Activity N |
|------------|------------|------------|------------|
| Task 1.1 | Task 2.1 | Task 3.1 | Task N.1 |
| Task 1.2 | Task 2.2 | Task 3.2 | |
| | Task 2.3 | | |
---
### Walking Skeleton
{List the minimum tasks from each activity that form the thinnest end-to-end slice}
### Release 1: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}
### Release 2: {outcome target}
{Tasks included, outcome KPI targeted, rationale}Prioritization Template (prioritization.md)
# Prioritization: {feature-name}
## Release Priority
| Priority | Release | Target Outcome | KPI | Rationale |
|----------|---------|---------------|-----|-----------|
| 1 | Walking Skeleton | End-to-end flow works | {KPI} | Validates core assumption |
| 2 | {name} | {outcome} | {KPI} | {why this order} |
## Backlog Suggestions
| Story | Release | Priority | Outcome Link | Dependencies |
|-------|---------|----------|-------------|--------------|
| US-01 | WS | P1 | {KPI-1} | None |
| US-02 | R1 | P2 | {KPI-2} | US-01 |
> **Note**: In Phase 2.5, stories are task-level placeholders (e.g., "Search by category").
> Story IDs (US-01) are assigned in Phase 4 (Requirements). Revisit this table after Phase 4.Anti-Patterns
| Anti
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).
Repo: nWave-ai/nWave
Other skills on nwave.
- /nw-ab-critique-dimensions
Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation
Open skill - /nw-abr-critique-dimensions
Review dimensions for validating agent quality - template compliance, safety, testing, and priority validation
Open skill - /nw-ad-critique-dimensions
Review dimensions for acceptance test quality - happy path bias, GWT compliance, business language purity, coverage completeness, walking skeleton user-centricity, priority validation, observable behavior assertions, traceability coverage, and walking skeleton boundary proof
Open skill - /nw-agent-creation-workflow
Detailed 5-phase workflow for creating agents - from requirements analysis through validation and iterative refinement
Open skill - /nw-agent-testing
5-layer testing approach for agent validation including adversarial testing, security validation, and prompt injection resistance
Open skill - /nw-architectural-styles-tradeoffs
Architectural style selection decision matrices, trade-off analysis, structural enforcement rules, and combination patterns. Load when choosing or evaluating architecture styles.
Open skill

