scope-cutter
Skill2 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Helps startups cut features to true MVP by identifying the minimum set of capabilities needed to deliver core value. Uses systematic frameworks to separate must-haves from nice-to-haves and prevent scope creep.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 42
Ask the critical question:
- Distinctive: line 73
Search (use browser Ctrl+F or simple filter)
- Distinctive: line 121
When scope creep is detected:
- Distinctive: line 122
Write it down (backlog, not sprint)
- Distinctive: line 123
Ask: "Does this help us validate our hypothesis faster?"
- Distinctive: line 124
If no → Defer with a specific trigger condition
- Distinctive: line 125
If yes → Evaluate against current sprint capacity
- Distinctive: line 149
Remove features already in production
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Scope Cutter - MVP Scoping for Startups
Overview
Ruthlessly cuts features to the true minimum needed to test your core hypothesis. The best MVP is embarrassingly small — but it ships.
1. When to Apply
| Trigger | Behavior |
| PRD review with too many features | Guided scope reduction |
| "MVP scope", "what to cut" | Feature triage workflow |
| Sprint overcommit detected | Emergency scope reduction |
| Pre-launch feature list review | Ship/defer/kill classification |
2. The Scope Cutting Framework
Step 1: Identify Core Value Proposition
Ask the critical question:
"If your product could only do ONE thing, what would it be?"
This becomes the Core Job — everything else is evaluated against it.
Step 2: Feature Triage (MoSCoW + Startup Twist)
Classify every feature:
| Category | Definition | Startup Rule |
| Must | Product is broken without it | Cannot demo without it |
| Should | Important but workaround exists | Users will ask for it in Week 2 |
| Could | Nice-to-have, enhances UX | Users might not even notice |
| Won't | Not now, maybe later | Kill it. No "maybe later" backlog bloat |
Step 3: Apply Cutting Rules
The 5 Cutting Questions:
- Does it test our core hypothesis? No → Cut
- Can users achieve the core job without it? Yes → Cut
- Would we learn something new by building it? No → Cut
- Can we fake it manually first? Yes → Cut (do it manually)
- Does it need to exist at launch? No → Cut
Common "Feels Essential but Isn't" Features:
- Admin dashboard (use database directly at first)
- Email notifications (send manually)
- User settings/preferences (use sensible defaults)
- Social login (email/password is fine for MVP)
- Dark mode, i18n, responsive (pick ONE platform)
- Search (use browser Ctrl+F or simple filter)
- Analytics dashboard (use GA/Mixpanel directly)
- Password reset flow (do it via support manually)
Step 4: Output Scope Decision
## Scope Decision: [Feature/Product Name]
### Core Job
> [One sentence: what the product must do]
### Ship (Must Have) — [N] features
- [ ] [Feature] — [why it's essential for core job]
- [ ] [Feature] — [why it's essential for core job]
### Defer (Post-Launch) — [N] features
- [Feature] — [why it can wait] — **Trigger**: [when to build it]
- [Feature] — [why it can wait] — **Trigger**: [when to build it]
### Kill (Won't Build) — [N] features
- ~~[Feature]~~ — [why it's not needed]
### Manual Workarounds
| Instead of Building | Do This Manually |
|---------------------|-----------------|
| Admin dashboard | Direct DB queries |
| Email notifications | Manual emails via Mailchimp |
| User onboarding flow | Personal demo calls |
### Estimated Effort After Cutting
- Before: [X] weeks
- After: [Y] weeks
- Savings: [X-Y] weeks ([percentage]% reduction)3. Scope Creep Prevention Rules
Red Flags During Development
- "While we're at it, let's also..."
- "It would be easy to just add..."
- "Users might want..."
- "Competitors have..."
- "What if we need to..."
Response Protocol
When scope creep is detected:
- Write it down (backlog, not sprint)
- Ask: "Does this help us validate our hypothesis faster?"
- If no → Defer with a specific trigger condition
- If yes → Evaluate against current sprint capacity
4. Tool Coordination
| Tool | Purpose |
| Read | Analyze existing PRD/feature list |
| Write | Generate scope decision document |
| Grep | Search for feature references in codebase |
5. Boundaries
Will:
- Challenge every feature against core value proposition
- Provide concrete "manual workaround" alternatives
- Quantify effort savings from scope reduction
- Set clear triggers for when deferred features should be built
Will Not:
- Make the final cut decision (present analysis, you decide)
- Remove features already in production
- Ignore user safety or legal requirements in cutting
- Suggest cutting core authentication/security features
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- opelpleple/meta-skills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository28 other files it gives its agents.
- brand-voiceSkill
- community-builderSkill
- email-sequenceSkill
- growth-experimentSkill
- landing-page-genSkill
- pitch-deckSkill
- referral-programSkill
- budget-plannerSkill
- fundraising-prepSkill
- legal-checklistSkill
- meeting-notesSkill
- okr-builderSkill
- postmortem-writerSkill
- retrospective-guideSkill
- risk-registerSkill
- sop-writerSkill
- experiment-designerSkill
- metrics-trackerSkill
- prd-writerSkill
- user-interview-guideSkill
- ai-integrationSkill
- api-first-designSkill
- db-schema-designerSkill
- deploy-pipelineSkill
- infra-as-codeSkill
- monitoring-setupSkill
- mvp-scaffoldSkill
- test-generatorSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

