agentleFS
nesnilnehcnesnilnehc/ai-cortex/skills/design-strategic-goals/SKILL.md

design-strategic-goals

Skill8 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Define 3–5 long-term strategic goals that move the project toward the vision and North Star. Produces a goals document aligned with mission, vision, and NSM; persisted to docs.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

20 rules. About 0 are common, 16 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈16

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Ensure alignment with the vision and the North Star (read from the "define-vision" / "define-north-star" output, or from existing …

    line 41
  2. Distinctive:

    Write requirements, roadmaps, or backlog (use "analyse-requirements", "project-planning", "capture-work-items").

    line 49
  3. Distinctive:

    When the backlog lacks goal alignment: create explicit goals so the roadmap and the backlog can trace to them.

    line 57
  4. Very specific:

    Cold-start fallback: when vision.md and north-star.md are both missing, do not halt.

    line 67
  5. Distinctive:

    Choice of options: if the user has more than 5 candidate goals, offer to rank or cluster them into 3-5.

    line 68
  6. Distinctive:

    Confirm: before overwriting an existing strategic goals file.

    line 69
  7. Very specific:

    Load the vision, North Star, and strategic pillars: read docs/project-overview/vision.md, docs/project-overview/north-star.md, and …

    line 73
  8. Distinctive:

    Work backwards from the North Star metric: ask "what must be true for the North Star metric to grow?" Each "must be true" is a candidate …

    line 75
  9. Distinctive:

    Ask about or judge the project's planning horizon (> 6 months counts as a long-term project).

    line 78
  10. Distinctive:

    Check alignment: every goal supports the vision.

    line 81
  11. Distinctive:

    Persist: write to the path agreed for the project.

    line 82
  12. Distinctive:

    Every candidate goal must carry an "inference basis" pointing at a specific file and location.

    line 99
  13. Very specific:

    Leave a marker at the top of the persisted document: > This batch of goals lacks vision / North Star backing and is a temporary anchor.

    line 101
  14. Distinctive:

    Do not define the mission, vision, North Star, or milestones in this skill.

    line 161
  15. Distinctive:

    Do not put dates or stages in the goals document (those belong to "define-roadmap").

    line 162
  16. Distinctive:

    Must not write an unsupported goal in fallback mode: every candidate goal must point at a specific extraction-source file and location.

    line 166
  17. Distinctive:

    Requirements or backlog: use "analyse-requirements", "capture-work-items", project planning.

    line 176
  18. Distinctive:

    If no: the goals are probably too tactical, or the alignment is missing.

    line 210
  19. Distinctive:

    If yes: the strategic goals are done.

    line 211
  20. Very specific:

    Write the document with a marker at the top: > This batch of goals lacks vision / North Star backing and is a temporary anchor.

    line 247

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Skill: Design Strategic Goals

Purpose

Define 3-5 long-term strategic goals that move the project toward the vision and the North Star. Produce an outcome-centred goals document (not a task list or a roadmap). Does not define mission, vision, North Star, or milestones.


Core Objective

Primary goal: produce a user-confirmed strategic goals document holding 3-5 outcome-centred goals aligned with the vision and the North Star, persisted to the path agreed for the project.

Success criteria (all must be met):

  1. ✅ 3-5 goals recorded: exactly 3-5 strategic goals, each with a clear title and a short description.
  2. ✅ Outcome-centred: each goal describes an outcome whose attainment can be judged, not a task list, a feature list, or a restatement of a pillar direction.
  3. ✅ Aligned with the vision: every goal supports the vision; the alignment is stated or self-evident.
  4. ✅ North Star link: at least one goal explicitly supports or moves the North Star metric; optional: a short note per goal on "how this supports the vision/NSM".
  5. ✅ User confirmation: the user explicitly approves (e.g. "approved", "looks good", "go ahead", or equivalent).
  6. ✅ Document persisted: written to the agreed path (default docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md, or per project norms).
  7. ✅ Engineering-health goal included: a long-term project (planning horizon > 6 months) must include a goal of the "sustainable engineering / governance health" kind; a short-term or experimental project may take an explicit exemption and record the reason in the document. Rationale: without a strategic sponsor, the long-term value of governance / tech-debt / documentation work can be overlooked during prioritization.

Acceptance test: can a reader see how each of the 3-5 goals advances the vision and the North Star, with no dates or stages (those belong to milestones)? Does a long-term project carry one goal that speaks for governance / engineering health?

Handoff point: once the goals are approved and persisted, hand off to "define-roadmap" to break the goals into stage checkpoints, or stop.


Scope Boundaries

This skill does:

  • Elicit and record 3-5 long-term strategic goals.
  • Ensure alignment with the vision and the North Star (read from the "define-vision" / "define-north-star" output, or from existing documents).
  • Persist to the path agreed for the project (default "docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md").
  • Optional: a note per goal explaining how it supports the vision or the North Star.

This skill does not do:

  • Define the mission, vision, or North Star (use "define-mission", "define-vision", "define-north-star").
  • Break goals into stages or dates (use "define-roadmap").
  • Write requirements, roadmaps, or backlog (use "analyse-requirements", "project-planning", "capture-work-items").

Use Cases

  • After the vision and the North Star: set 3-5 strategic outcomes that advance the vision and move the NSM.
  • Annual or quarterly strategy: define or update strategic priorities.
  • When the backlog lacks goal alignment: create explicit goals so the roadmap and the backlog can trace to them.
  • The fourth layer of the strategy chain: follows mission, vision, and North Star when the full hierarchy is being built.

Behavior

Interaction Policy

  • Default: the output path from project norms if one exists; otherwise "docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md". Read the vision and the North Star from "docs/project-overview/" if they are there.
  • Cold-start fallback: when vision.md and north-star.md are both missing, do not halt; switch to "Cold-Start Fallback Mode" below and infer candidate goals from repository evidence. When only one is missing, stay on the normal path and derive from the one that exists.
  • Choice of options: if the user has more than 5 candidate goals, offer to rank or cluster them into 3-5; ask the user to confirm the final set.
  • Confirm: before overwriting an existing strategic goals file; before the final persist.

Execution Process

  1. Load the vision, North Star, and strategic pillars: read docs/project-overview/vision.md, docs/project-overview/north-star.md, and docs/project-overview/strategic-pillars.md (where present), or a summary supplied by the user.
    • Both missing → switch to "Cold-Start Fallback Mode"; the remaining steps are unchanged.
  2. Work backwards from the North Star metric: ask "what must be true for the North Star metric to grow?" Each "must be true" is a candidate goal. Goals climb in layers, from base capability to refinement.
  3. Draft the goals: focus on outcomes (e.g. "cut deployment time to under 5 minutes for 80% of teams"); not a task list or a feature list.
  4. Engineering-health goal check:
    • Ask about or judge the project's planning horizon (> 6 months counts as a long-term project).
    • Long-term project whose draft has no engineering / governance health goal → ask the user whether to bring in the default template (see "Engineering-Health Goal Template" below); the user can adjust the key results to fit the project.
    • Short-term or experimental project where the user takes the exemption → record the "exemption rationale" at the end of the document.
  5. Check alignment: every goal supports the vision; at least one explicitly supports the North Star.
  6. Persist: write to the path agreed for the project; create "docs/project-overview/" if it is missing. Optional: add "how this supports the vision/NSM" to each goal.

Cold-Start Fallback Mode

Trigger: vision.md and north-star.md are both missing. Working backwards from the North Star then has no basis, but the repository itself is an extractable evidence source — this must not degrade into interrogating the user from scratch, item by item.

Extraction sources (ordered by intent density; work down the list and stop once you have enough):

  1. README.md / AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md — the intent the project states about itself
  2. CHANGELOG.md — where effort actually went; the highest intent density
  3. Recent git log — same as above; the two are independent, and git log on its own is enough when CHANGELOG is missing — do not skip this level because one of the two is absent
  4. Code directory structure and dependency manifest — the capability boundary
  5. Existing backlog / issues — unmet needs
  6. The rest of docs/

Safety constraints (not omissible): a goal inferred from evidence reads as coherent and fluent — which is exactly why it is most likely to be invention filling a blank. So:

  • Every candidate goal must carry an "inference basis" pointing at a specific file and location. A goal whose basis cannot be derived must not be written
  • Mark everything as inferred rather than confirmed. Must not persist automatically; the user must confirm or correct each item
  • Leave a marker at the top of the persisted document: > This batch of goals lacks vision / North Star backing and is a temporary anchor; once the upstream is in place this skill must be rerun
  • Tell the user plainly: this is fallback output, and the normal path is to run define-vision and define-north-star first

Output shape:

## Candidate Goal N: <goal title>

**Description**: <one outcome-centred sentence>

**Inference basis**:
- The last 5 `CHANGELOG.md` entries cluster on direction X
- `README.md` line 12 states the goal as Y

**To confirm**: this goal was inferred from evidence — confirm it, correct it, or delete it

Engineering-Health Goal Template (Default)

A long-term project must hold a goal of this kind (tune the specific key results per project):

## Goal N: Sustainable Engineering and Governance Health

**Description**: keep the project's code quality, documentation consistency, and
governance mechanisms evolving, so the other strategic goals stay achievable long-term.

**Key results** (illustrative; tune per project):
- Core documentation norms (ARTIFACT_NORMS) 100% compliant
- ADR coverage ≥ 90% (every architecture decision is documented)
- Tech-debt backlog item count ≤ X (set by team size)
- Governance health matrix pass rate ≥ 95% (plan-next output)
- Production incident MTTR ≤ Y hours

This goal supports the long-term achievability of all the other strategic goals; it is not a standalone product goal. Its existence guarantees that governance / tech-debt / documentation groundwork holds a legitimate strategic position in the competition for value — goal mapping makes its long-term value explicit when items are prioritized alongside product work.


Input & Output

Input:

  • Required: project context.
  • Required on the normal path: the vision; the North Star (or paths to the vision/North Star documents). When both are missing, switch to cold-start fallback mode and infer from repository evidence.
  • Optional: mission; time horizon; existing goals or priorities.

Output:

  • Artifact: the strategic goals document.
  • Location: docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md (or per project norms).
  • Content: 3-5 strategic goals (title + short description); optional: links to the vision/NSM, and a "how this supports the vision/NSM" note per goal.
  • Lifecycle: living (reviewed on the strategy cycle).

Restrictions

Hard Boundaries

  • Do not define the mission, vision, North Star, or milestones in this skill.
  • Do not put dates or stages in the goals document (those belong to "define-roadmap").
  • The document must not carry fewer than 3 or more than 5 strategic goals.
  • A long-term project (planning horizon > 6 months) must not drop the engineering / governance health goal entirely; an exemption must record its reason in the document.
  • Must not persist automatically in fallback mode: an evidence-inferred candidate goal is written only after the user confirms or corrects each item.
  • Must not write an unsupported goal in fallback mode: every candidate goal must point at a specific extraction-source file and location; where no basis can be derived, leave it out.

Skill Boundaries (no overlap)

Do not do these (other skills handle them):

  • Mission: why we exist → use define-mission.
  • Vision: what future we are building → use "define-vision".
  • North Star: the single metric → use define-north-star.
  • Milestones: stage checkpoints → use define-roadmap.
  • Requirements or backlog: use "analyse-requirements", "capture-work-items", project planning.

When to stop and hand off:

  • The user says "approved" or equivalent → the goals are done; offer the handoff to "define-roadmap".
  • The user asks for stages or milestones → hand off to "define-roadmap".

Self-Check

Core Success Criteria (all must be met)

  • 3–5 goals recorded: exactly 3–5 strategic goals, with titles and descriptions.
  • Outcome-focused: every goal is an outcome or a result, not a task list.
  • Aligned with the vision: every goal supports the vision.
  • North Star link: at least one goal explicitly supports or moves the North Star (not applicable in fallback mode; the next item replaces it).
  • Fallback-mode compliance (fallback path only): every goal carries an inference basis pointing at a specific file; each has been confirmed by the user; the document header carries the "no upstream backing, temporary anchor" marker.
  • Engineering-health goal: a long-term project holds an engineering / governance health goal; an exemption has its reason recorded.
  • User confirmation: the user said "approved", "looks good", "go ahead", or similar.
  • Document persisted: written to the agreed path (default docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md, or project norms).

Process Quality Checks

  • Vision/NSM used: did I read or request the vision and the North Star before drafting goals?
  • No dates or stages: did I avoid putting milestones or timelines into the goals document?
  • Goals are not restated pillars: each goal describes an outcome whose attainment can be judged, not an ongoing direction.
  • Goals may span pillars: one goal can touch several pillars; goals and pillars need not map one to one.
  • Layered progression: the goals hold a clear layering from base capability to refinement.

Acceptance Test

Can a reader see how each goal advances the vision and the North Star with no dates or stages?

If no: the goals are probably too tactical, or the alignment is missing. Sharpen the outcomes and state the alignment. If yes: the strategic goals are done. Move to the handoff or stop.


Examples

Example 1: Full hierarchy in place

Context: the vision and the North Star exist. The user wants 3-5 strategic goals.

Process: read the vision and North Star documents. Derive outcomes (e.g. "80% of teams deploy within 5 minutes", "zero manual steps in a standard deployment", "a complete audit trail for every deployment"). Draft 3-5 goals; state how each supports the vision/NSM. The user confirms. Write to "docs/project-overview/strategic-goals.md".

Result: the goals are persisted; offer the handoff to "define-roadmap".

Example 2: The user proposes six goals

Context: the user lists six candidate goals; the plan allows only 3-5.

Process: cluster or rank them down to 3-5 (e.g. merge two related goals, or drop the lowest-ranked one). Present the set of 3-5 with the rationale; ask the user to confirm or adjust. Make sure each one is outcome-centred and aligned with the vision/NSM. Persist once confirmed.

Result: the document holds exactly 3-5 goals; the user explicitly approved the set.

Example 4: Cold-start fallback (edge case)

Context: a newly inherited repository holds only a README and source code; docs/project-overview/ is empty. The user wants the strategic goals stood up first.

Process:

  1. Detect that vision.md and north-star.md are both missing → switch to fallback mode, and tell the user this is fallback output.
  2. Scan in extraction-source order: the README states "let small and mid-sized teams run a private deployment with no ops work"; the last 8 CHANGELOG entries cluster on the install script and cross-platform compatibility; 5 backlog items are complaints about missing documentation.
  3. Infer 3 candidate goals, each with its basis:
    • Candidate 1 "install and it runs" ← the README:3 statement + the direction of the last 8 CHANGELOG entries
    • Candidate 2 "documentation is self-service" ← 5 backlog complaints
    • Candidate 3 "sustainable engineering and governance health" ← required for a long-term project
  4. Present the candidate list, marked "inferred from evidence — confirm, correct, or delete", and write nothing to disk.
  5. The user rewords candidate 2 and confirms the other two.
  6. Write the document with a marker at the top: > This batch of goals lacks vision / North Star backing and is a temporary anchor; once the upstream is in place this skill must be rerun.
  7. Tell the user: the normal path is to run define-vision and define-north-star first, then rerun this skill once they are in place.

Result: the chain does not spin at its starting point; the output is usable but explicitly marked as temporary, and every item's source can be looked up.

Example 3: Long-term project with no engineering-health goal (edge case)

Context: the user drafted 4 strategic goals, all user- or market-oriented; the planning horizon is 12 months (a long-term project).

Process:

  1. Detect that none of the 4 goals touches engineering / governance health.
  2. Tell the user: "This is a long-term project; an engineering-health goal is recommended here, otherwise tech-debt and governance work has no strategic sponsor over the long run and its long-term value may be overlooked during prioritization."
  3. Show the default template; the user tunes the key results (e.g. "tech-debt backlog item count ≤ 20" becomes "≤ 30", based on team size).
  4. The user confirms it as goal 5.
  5. Persist the 5 goals.

Result: the document holds 5 strategic goals, goal 5 being "sustainable engineering and governance health". Governance work can then trace its value to this goal during prioritization.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.