scope-hammer
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Cut brainstorm output to a shippable MVP: delete, mock, reuse, or ship.
In this repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-skills-agentsAGENTS.md
- agent-skills-claudeCLAUDE.md
- agent-log-forensicsSkill
- changelog-writerSkill
- chezmoi-driftSkill
- contacts-unifySkill
- decision-logSkill
- dependency-pinningSkill
- django-smoke-alarmSkill
- empathy-auditSkill
- first-contactSkill
- handle-prSkill
- launch-sequenceSkill
- parallel-isolated-app-testingSkill
- post-mortemSkill
- pre-mortemSkill
- profile-meSkill
- ralph-loopSkill
- release-operatorSkill
- remote-host-verifierSkill
- research-personSkill
- second-opinionsSkill
- status-copy-trust-auditSkill
- support-stormSkill
- trust-auditSkill
- visual-qa-loopSkill
- wide-open-brainstormSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈11
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 21
After a brainstorm session
- Distinctive: line 22
When a feature list has grown unmanageable
- Distinctive: line 23
When the team is debating too many options and needs a forcing function
- Distinctive: line 24
When "MVP" has quietly expanded to "everything"
- Distinctive: line 25
When someone asks "what's the minimum we need to launch?"
- Distinctive: line 29
Before brainstorming (you need ideas before you can kill them)
- Distinctive: line 30
When the goal is exhaustive requirements gathering
- Distinctive: line 31
When stakeholders need to see all options (use brainstorm output.
- Distinctive: line 44
If the input is vague, ask: "Give me the list of features or ideas you want me to scope."
- Distinctive: line 73
Search → use Algolia (or Postgres full-text for small scale)
- Distinctive: line 81
If you can't describe why a SHIP item directly serves day-one user value, reconsider.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 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 Hammer
The brainstorm produced 30 ideas. The scope hammer asks: which 5 do you actually need to ship?
Companion to wide-open-brainstorm. Where brainstorm goes wide, scope-hammer goes ruthless.
When to Use
- After a brainstorm session
- When a feature list has grown unmanageable
- When the team is debating too many options and needs a forcing function
- When "MVP" has quietly expanded to "everything"
- When someone asks "what's the minimum we need to launch?"
When NOT to Use
- Before brainstorming (you need ideas before you can kill them)
- When the goal is exhaustive requirements gathering
- When stakeholders need to see all options (use brainstorm output; this skill produces the answer)
<process>Phase 1: Load the Input
Accept one of:
- The output of a wide-open-brainstorm session (pasted or from context)
- A feature list, backlog, or spec
- A verbal description ("we're thinking of building X with features A, B, C, D, E...")
If the input is vague, ask: "Give me the list of features or ideas you want me to scope."
Extract the core goal first: "What does this product need to do to be worth using on day one?"
Phase 2: Classify Each Item
For every idea or feature in the input, apply exactly one classification:
Classifications
DELETE — This will never be in the product. Reasons:
- Adds complexity without adding core value
- Solves a problem users don't have yet
- Duplicates something else in the list
- Is actually a distraction from the core loop
- Would require significant infrastructure not justified by usage
MOCK — The user thinks they need this, but a fake version will do for launch. Examples:
- Manual process behind a button (instead of automation)
- Static content instead of dynamic CMS
- CSV import instead of API integration
- Human review instead of AI (at first)
- Hardcoded list instead of user-configured settings
ALREADY EXISTS — A standard library, tool, or service already does this. Don't build it. Examples:
- Auth → use an auth provider
- Payments → use Stripe
- Email → use Resend/Postmark
- Analytics → use Plausible/PostHog
- Search → use Algolia (or Postgres full-text for small scale)
SHIP — This is core. Users cannot get value without it. Ship this first.
Classification Rules
- Everything starts as DELETE. Earn its way to SHIP.
- MOCK is underused. Push more items to MOCK.
- If you can't describe why a SHIP item directly serves day-one user value, reconsider.
- Maximum 5 SHIP items for an MVP. If you have 8, go back and mock or delete 3.
Phase 3: Parallel Ruthlessness Check
Launch a second analysis as a subagent with the mandate: "Here is the proposed MVP scope (SHIP items only). Challenge it. Find: (1) SHIP items that could be MOCKed for launch without users noticing, (2) SHIP items that are actually implicit in other SHIP items, (3) anything that will block day-one launch but isn't in the SHIP list."
Incorporate findings into the final output.
Phase 4: MVP Specification
Produce:
The Core Loop
One paragraph: what does the user do from first launch to first value? This is the path the MVP must make possible. Everything else is optional.
SHIP Items (numbered, max 5)
For each: what it does, why it's required (not just nice-to-have), estimated complexity (S/M/L/XL).
MOCK Items (numbered)
For each: what we'd fake, how we'd fake it, when we'd replace it with real implementation.
ALREADY EXISTS Items (numbered)
For each: which tool/service handles it, link if obvious.
DELETE Items (brief list)
Just names — no need to justify each one in detail. "These don't make the cut for v1."
Launch Sequence Estimate
Rough order of implementation: what must be built first (blocking), what can be built in parallel, what can be built post-launch.
The Honest Summary
One paragraph: "To launch this, you need to build X, Y, and Z. Everything else is a future version. The first version can be live in [rough estimate] if you start with [first thing]."
</process>Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
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.

