roadmap
Skill49 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Build evidence-backed software/product roadmaps from repo state, tickets, ideas, audit findings, or user goals — prioritize and sequence work across Now/Next/Later, milestones, dependencies, risks, and handoffs. Use when asked for a roadmap, feature roadmap, technical roadmap, release plan, milestone plan, backlog prioritization, sequencing, what to build next, or to turn improve/ideate/brainstorm/design-discussion outputs into an execution sequence. Not for implementing code or writing PR-level plans.
48 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- gopalparashar421/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- dirien/yet-another-agent-harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Ovich/charrettetheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- ryanmoelter/plumetheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- eyssette/js-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- danielcherubini/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use sequence, stakeholder-update and 10 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.
GTMifySkillsequence
Build a multi-channel outreach cadence (email + LinkedIn + phone) for a target persona or named prospect. Use when the user says 'build a sequence', 'outreach cadence', 'multi-touch sequence', 'multi-channel cadence', 'follow-up sequence', or needs a coordinated multi-channel play. Do NOT use for single cold emails — use cold-email instead.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkillstakeholder-update
Generate a stakeholder update tailored to audience and cadence. Use when writing a weekly or monthly status for leadership, announcing a launch, escalating a risk or blocker, or translating the same progress into exec-brief, engineering-detail, or customer-facing versions.
Also in 3 projects that use this
EpistatesSkillstrategy
Plan weekly or monthly X content strategy. Use when the user wants to plan their content calendar, set growth goals, build a content pipeline, or think strategically about their X presence.
Also in 3 projects that use this
ArvorCoSkillspecify
Create feature specification from natural language description. Use when starting a new feature or creating a spec. Triggers on: create spec, specify feature, new feature spec.
Also in 3 projects that use this
GitHubSkillprd
Generate high-quality Product Requirements Documents (PRDs) for software systems and AI-powered features. Includes executive summaries, user stories, technical specifications, and risk analysis.
Also in 7 projects that use this
michalattSkillchallenge
Pressure-test plans, decisions, and directions by picking and answering the most relevant challenge questions for the current conversation
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions48 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 48
- cloudposse/atmos★ 1.4ksame name
- me2resh/apexyard★ 542same name
- andreaskelm/pm-brain★ 235same name
- genkovich/sdd★ 187same name
- YougLin-dev/Aha-Loop★ 181same name
- Ovid/paad★ 150same name
- facebookresearch/autoform-bot★ 136same name
- Mehdibargach/claude-code-pm-skills★ 97same name
- spmtitsolution/OpenBA-Kit★ 38same name
- V-Songbird/foreman★ 35same name
38 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 repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- coding-standardsSkill
- coolify-composeSkill
- crafting-effective-readmesSkill
- diataxisSkill
- english-pleaseSkill
- feature-planning-artifactsSkill
- frontend-design-principlesSkill
- grug-brained-devSkill
- html-artifactsSkill
- improveSkill
- improving-promptsSkill
- jjSkill
- reducing-entropySkill
- researching-codebasesSkill
- roadmap-to-improve-plansSkill
- rustSkill
- salsaSkill
- skill-authoringSkill
- strategic-roadmapSkill
- svelte5Skill
- sveltekitSkill
- writing-cli-skillsSkill
- writing-error-messagesSkill
- writing-plansSkill
- writingSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 41 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 12
Default roadmap items are outcomes/capabilities/features.
- Distinctive: line 16
Never modify source code. Write only roadmap artifacts unless the user explicitly asks for downstream artifacts.
- Distinctive: line 30
Ask only for missing decisions that would change the roadmap.
- Very specific: line 36
Read user-provided docs, issues, tickets, ideas, designs, plans, README, AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md, CONTEXT.md, ADRs, and existing roadmaps.
- Very specific: line 37
If the roadmap comes from improve, read the selected findings, rejected findings, and dependency notes.
- Very specific: line 38
If the roadmap comes from ideation flow, read the relevant docs/ideas/, docs/tickets/, and docs/agents/<slug>/ artifacts.
- Distinctive: line 39
If the roadmap is codebase-grounded and no candidates exist, do light read-only direction scouting: TODO/FIXME themes, half-built surfaces, …
- Distinctive: line 41
Do not run mutating commands.
- Distinctive: line 43
Default recon stops when you can name 5–10 plausible candidates with sources, or when the obvious source set is exhausted.
- Distinctive: line 71
Use Now / Next / Later / Not now unless the user gave a concrete release cadence.
- Distinctive: line 73
Every Now item needs a clear next move:
- Very specific: line 80
No useful action → stop
- Distinctive: line 95
Not obviously in a project?
- Very specific: line 97
Use assets/roadmap-template.md.
- Distinctive: line 99
After writing, respond with the artifact path, the top Now items, and the next handoff to start.
- Distinctive: line 125
Every Now/Next item is high-level enough to be roadmap material and has evidence plus a next handoff.
- Distinctive: line 127
Not now records rejected or deferred work with one-line reasons.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 41 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
Roadmap
Turn goals, candidate ideas, tickets, findings, and design docs into a high-level view of what's coming up.
A roadmap is direction + prioritization + dependencies. It says what capabilities, outcomes, or strategic tracks are likely next, why they matter, and what must happen before they are real. It is not a wish list, transcript, date promise, backlog dump, sprint plan, or implementation plan.
Default roadmap items are outcomes/capabilities/features. Use Agile-shaped nouns — epics, milestones, phases — only when they clarify sequencing or match the project's vocabulary. Features and epics describe what changes; milestones and phases describe ordering, gates, or release boundaries.
Stay one altitude above writing-plans: decide ordering, slices, gates, and handoffs; do not design unresolved internals or prescribe code. If one item needs product shaping, hand it to brainstorm. If technical choices are unresolved, hand it to design-discussion. If implementation is decided, hand it to writing-plans.
Never modify source code. Write only roadmap artifacts unless the user explicitly asks for downstream artifacts.
Workflow
Phase 1 — Set the altitude
Identify the roadmap's audience and horizon:
- Audience: maintainer, product owner, implementation agents, contributors, leadership, or future-you.
- Horizon: now/next/later by default; use releases, milestones, quarters, or dates only when the user gives a real cadence.
- Scope: whole repo, product area, feature family, technical debt, launch, migration, or agent execution stack.
- Item vocabulary: capability/feature by default; epic, milestone, phase, or initiative only when useful.
- Output: inline answer or durable artifact.
Ask only for missing decisions that would change the roadmap. Ask one question at a time and include your recommended default.
Phase 2 — Recon
Gather source material before prioritizing:
- Read user-provided docs, issues, tickets, ideas, designs, plans,
README,AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md,CONTEXT.md, ADRs, and existing roadmaps. - If the roadmap comes from
improve, read the selected findings, rejected findings, and dependency notes. - If the roadmap comes from ideation flow, read the relevant
docs/ideas/,docs/tickets/, anddocs/agents/<slug>/artifacts. - If the roadmap is codebase-grounded and no candidates exist, do light read-only direction scouting: TODO/FIXME themes, half-built surfaces, documented-but-undelivered promises, surface asymmetries, high-churn areas, and adjacent capabilities the current architecture makes cheap.
Do not run mutating commands. If evidence is weak, mark the candidate as low confidence instead of padding it.
Default recon stops when you can name 5–10 plausible candidates with sources, or when the obvious source set is exhausted. If you find fewer than three candidates, say so and explain the evidence gap instead of wandering.
Phase 3 — Normalize candidates
Convert every candidate into the same shape:
| Field | Meaning |
| Type | capability, feature, epic, milestone, phase, technical track, research/spike, migration, or decision |
| Outcome | What becomes true for users, maintainers, or the system |
| Evidence | Source doc, code file:line, ticket, finding, or user goal |
| First slice | The smallest coherent increment worth doing first |
| Dependency | What must happen before this can land or be useful |
| Risk | Delivery, product, technical, migration, or adoption risk |
| Confidence | HIGH / MED / LOW, based on evidence strength |
| Next handoff | brainstorm, questions, research, design-discussion, writing-plans, user decision, or stop |
Collapse duplicates. Split sprawling items. Reject generic suggestions that could apply to any repo.
Phase 4 — Prioritize and sequence
Order by leverage, not volume:
- Work that unlocks or de-risks later work.
- High-value, low-effort items with strong evidence.
- Learning spikes that retire major uncertainty before commitment.
- Risky or expensive items only after prerequisites and validation gates exist.
Use Now / Next / Later / Not now unless the user gave a concrete release cadence. Dates without capacity evidence are false precision. Keep the output high-level enough that a maintainer can understand what's coming without reading implementation plans.
Every Now item needs a clear next move:
- Fuzzy product scope →
brainstorm - Missing facts or codebase unknowns →
questionsorresearch - Unresolved technical choices →
design-discussion - Decided implementation →
writing-plans - Already tactical and small → ask whether to execute directly or capture it as a small
writing-plansitem - No useful action →
stop
Phase 5 — Write and reconcile
For durable artifacts, choose the shape first:
- Canonical project roadmap —
./ROADMAP.mdat the project root. This is the default for a high-level view of what's coming up. - Scoped, historical, or alternate roadmap —
./docs/roadmaps/<slug>.mdif./docs/exists, otherwise./roadmaps/<slug>.md.
Resolve the destination in this order:
- User-specified path.
- Existing project roadmap convention.
./ROADMAP.mdfor the canonical project roadmap.- Scoped roadmap path from the shape rules above.
- Not obviously in a project? Ask.
Use assets/roadmap-template.md. Omit optional sections when they add no decision value. If the destination already exists, read it and update in place unless the user asks for a fresh roadmap. Preserve useful historical decisions; mark stale items as superseded instead of silently deleting context.
After writing, respond with the artifact path, the top Now items, and the next handoff to start.
Invocation variants
- Bare
roadmap→ build a standard now/next/later roadmap from available inputs and light recon. quick→ no broad scouting; use provided artifacts and obvious repo docs only.deep→ fuller source review and candidate discovery before sequencing.product,technical,migration,release,agent-execution→ focus the roadmap lens.from improve/from tickets/from ideas/from plans→ prioritize those sources first.
Common mistakes
| Mistake | Fix |
| Treating roadmap as a backlog dump | Cut aggressively; keep only high-level upcoming work and keep Not now explicit. |
| Inventing dates | Use Now/Next/Later unless cadence and capacity are real. |
| Letting generic ideas in | Require repo, artifact, user-goal, or code evidence. |
| Designing every item | Record the unresolved seam and route to the right next skill. |
| Writing PR-sized implementation plans | Stop at sequencing and hand off selected decided work to writing-plans. |
| Hiding uncertainty | Mark confidence and name the evidence gap. |
Quality bar
Before finishing, check:
- The roadmap has a named audience, horizon, scope, and item vocabulary.
- Every Now/Next item is high-level enough to be roadmap material and has evidence plus a next handoff.
- Dependencies explain why the sequence matters.
- Not now records rejected or deferred work with one-line reasons.
- Dates, if present, are backed by an actual cadence or capacity assumption.
- The final answer says what was not reviewed or remains uncertain.
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.

