estimate
Skill40 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Estimates effort for a story, batch of stories, or epic by analyzing complexity, dependencies, historical velocity, and risk factors. Produces a structured estimate with confidence levels. Use before sprint planning or when sizing a new request.
28 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- mehboobali98/rmine-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiostheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 19, 2026
- venus2099/codex-game-studiostheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- anis-dr/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
- Anuj7411/sipcodetheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use team-audio, playtest-report and 2 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
CoralGameSkillteam-audio
Orchestrate audio team: audio-director + sound-designer + technical-artist + gameplay-programmer for full audio pipeline from direction to implementation.
Also in 13 projects that use this
CoralGameSkillplaytest-report
Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis.
Also in 12 projects that use this
- +2 more from CoralGame
Other versions28 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 28
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- pixel-cellar/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 324same name
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 118same name
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
- Anuj7411/sipcode★ 46same name
- CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 19same name
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 17same name
- CodePhobiia/claude-roblox-game-studio★ 9same name
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 8same name
- viknesh20-20/claude-code-tool-kit★ 7same name
18 more not listed
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 repository77 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- design/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- docs/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- src/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- tests/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adoptSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- asset-auditSkill
- asset-specSkill
- balance-checkSkill
- brainstormSkill
- bug-reportSkill
- bug-triageSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- consistency-checkSkill
- content-auditSkill
- create-architectureSkill
- create-control-manifestSkill
- create-epicsSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- day-one-patchSkill
- design-bibleSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- extractSkill
- gate-checkSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- launch-checklistSkill
- localizeSkill
- map-systemsSkill
- milestone-reviewSkill
- onboardSkill
- patch-notesSkill
- perf-profileSkill
- prd-reviewSkill
- project-stage-detectSkill
- propagate-design-changeSkill
- prototypeSkill
- qa-planSkill
- quick-designSkill
- regression-suiteSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- reverse-documentSkill
- review-all-prdsSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- setup-frameworkSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- skill-testSkill
- smoke-checkSkill
- soak-testSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 25 edited versions we read keep these.
11
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 44
If no argument, ask:
- Distinctive: line 54
Read the last 2-3 sprint plans.
- Distinctive: line 67
Document the baseline source ("Computed from sprints 001-003" or "Heuristic — no sprint history").
- Distinctive: line 99
Cross-platform: if both iOS and Android target → +25-50%
- Distinctive: line 101
Backend integration: if real backend not yet ready → +50% for stub/mock work
- Distinctive: line 115
Ask: "Roughly how many user-visible behaviors?
- Distinctive: line 140
If any assumption is in doubt, add a note: "If this assumption fails, add 1-3 days."
- Distinctive: line 189
If a story is estimated 4+ days at Mid, recommend splitting before adding to a sprint
- Very specific: line 190
If overall confidence is LOW, recommend a small spike or /prototype to retire the biggest unknown before committing
- Distinctive: line 191
If a story is BLOCKED on missing inputs, refuse to estimate — name the input and recommend the unblocking skill
- Distinctive: line 197
Every story in scope has Low, Mid, High estimates and a confidence
- Distinctive: line 198
Every assumption is named — no hidden hand-waving
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 25 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Estimate
Estimation in mobile work is risky because framework knowledge gaps, platform divergence, and store review cycles inflate timelines. This skill produces estimates with explicit reasoning and confidence levels, not a single number.
Read-only.
Purpose / When to Run
Run when:
- Sizing a story before adding to a sprint
- Sizing an epic before committing to a milestone
- A new feature request needs a rough budget before deciding go / no-go
Inputs
- A story path, epic slug, or glob of stories
- Recent sprint plans (for velocity baseline)
- Story files in scope (for complexity analysis)
Outputs
- Printed estimate with low / mid / high bounds, confidence, and assumptions
Phase 1: Resolve Scope
Argument forms:
story <path>— one storyepic <slug>— all stories under that epicbatch <glob>— explicit list
If no argument, ask:
- Prompt: "Estimate what?"
- Options:
Single story,Whole epic,A list of stories,A new feature with no stories yet
For "feature with no stories yet", switch to T-shirt mode (Phase 4 alternate).
Phase 2: Establish Velocity Baseline
Read the last 2-3 sprint plans. From each:
- Stories planned vs. completed
- Capacity in dev-days
- Average story-days
Compute the rolling average story-day cost. If sprints don't exist yet, use the default heuristic:
- Logic story: 0.5-1 day
- Integration story: 1-2 days
- UI story: 1-2 days
- Visual / Feel story: 1-3 days
- Platform story (push, biometric, IAP, deep links): 2-4 days
- Config / Data story: 0.25-0.5 day
Document the baseline source ("Computed from sprints 001-003" or "Heuristic — no sprint history").
Phase 3: Per-Story Complexity Analysis
For each story in scope, read it and score:
Complexity factors (each adds time)
- Type:
- Logic: base
- Integration: +50%
- UI: base or +25% if novel
- Visual: +25-50%
- Platform: +50-100%
- Config: -50%
- Framework risk (from story header):
- LOW: 0
- MEDIUM: +25%
- HIGH: +50% (verification work)
- ADR status:
- Accepted: 0
- Proposed: +100% (risk that decision changes mid-implementation, or block)
- UX spec maturity (UI stories):
- Reviewed: 0
- Authored not reviewed: +25%
- Missing: BLOCKED — can't estimate
- Acceptance criteria count:
- 1-3: 0
- 4-6: +25%
- 7+: +50% (story may be too big — recommend split)
- Cross-platform: if both iOS and Android target → +25-50%
- Permission flow: any story that asks for permissions → +0.25 day for denied-state UX
- Backend integration: if real backend not yet ready → +50% for stub/mock work
- Store-review-affecting: any IAP, deletion, or privacy change → +0.5 day for review-prep tasks
Produce a per-story estimate: low (best case), mid (likely), high (if all risks materialize).
Phase 4: Aggregate
For epic / batch mode, sum the individual estimates:
- Sum lows, mids, highs separately
- Note the total confidence band (max / min ratio across stories)
For T-shirt mode (no stories yet):
- Ask: "Roughly how many user-visible behaviors? How many backend integrations? How many novel patterns vs. existing patterns?"
- Output a T-shirt size: XS (0.5-2 days), S (2-5), M (5-10), L (10-20), XL (20+) with reasoning
Phase 5: Confidence Levels
For each estimate, attach a confidence:
- HIGH — similar work has been done in the project; baseline is solid; ADRs accepted; framework risk LOW
- MEDIUM — some unknowns; framework risk MEDIUM or one Proposed ADR
- LOW — multiple unknowns: HIGH framework risk, novel area, no UX, missing ADRs
Confidence is reported alongside the number. A LOW-confidence estimate is a budget for further investigation, not a delivery commitment.
Phase 6: Surface Assumptions
The estimate is conditional on assumptions. List them:
- "Assumes ADR-0007 is Accepted by sprint start"
- "Assumes UX spec for login is reviewed before story-003"
- "Assumes backend
/auth/refreshendpoint is available" - "Assumes biometric works on the test device matrix listed in technical-preferences"
- "Excludes store-review wait time"
If any assumption is in doubt, add a note: "If this assumption fails, add 1-3 days."
Phase 7: Output
# Estimate
**Scope**: <story / epic / batch>
**Stories estimated**: <N>
## Per-story breakdown
| Story | Type | Complexity | Low | Mid | High | Confidence |
|-------|------|-----------|-----|-----|------|-----------|
| 001 — OAuth call | Logic, MED risk | base + 25% | 0.5d | 1d | 1.5d | HIGH |
| 002 — Token storage | Integration, MED risk | base + 75% | 1d | 2d | 3d | MEDIUM |
| ... | | | | | | |
## Total
- Low: <X>d
- Mid: <Y>d
- High: <Z>d
- Confidence: <HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW> overall
## Assumptions
- <list>
## Risks
- <list — items most likely to push toward High>
## Recommendation
- For sprint planning: budget <Mid + 20% buffer> = <Y * 1.2>d
- If only the Mid is committed and any risk materializes, the sprint will overflow
- For a milestone commit: budget the High end
- For a stretch goal: budget the Mid
## Notes
- Velocity baseline: <source>
- Stories that should be re-decomposed (too big): <list>
- Stories that should be Blocked (missing ADR / UX): <list>Phase 8: Recommendations
Common patterns to surface:
- If a story is estimated 4+ days at Mid, recommend splitting before adding to a sprint
- If overall confidence is LOW, recommend a small spike or
/prototypeto retire the biggest unknown before committing - If a story is BLOCKED on missing inputs, refuse to estimate — name the input and recommend the unblocking skill
Quality Gates
- Every story in scope has Low, Mid, High estimates and a confidence
- Every assumption is named — no hidden hand-waving
- Recommendation is concrete — a number for sprint planning, plus what to commit vs. stretch
- Read-only
Examples
/estimate epic auth-sign-in
- 8 stories, mid total: 14 days, high: 22, low: 9
- Confidence: MEDIUM (1 story BLOCKED, 1 with HIGH framework risk)
- Recommend: budget 17 dev-days for sprint commit; carry the HIGH-risk story to a follow-up sprint
/estimate story production/epics/auth/story-005-biometric.md
- Type: Platform, framework risk HIGH, ADR Proposed
- Mid: 3 days, High: 5
- Confidence: LOW
- Assumption: ADR-0007 advances to Accepted before story start
- Recommendation: do not include in next sprint until ADR is Accepted; add a 0.5-day spike to validate iOS biometric API on physical device first
/estimate (T-shirt mode)
- "How many user-visible behaviors?" — 3
- "Backend integrations?" — 1
- "Novel patterns?" — 0
- T-shirt: S (3-5 days)
- Confidence: MEDIUM, given no detailed PRD yet
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.

