Feature Prioritization

Purpose

Prioritize a feature backlog using a structured scoring framework (RICE by default) and produce a ranked list with rationale.

Input: Feature list, product vision or goals (optional), constraints (timeline, team size)
Output: Prioritized feature ranking with scores, trade-off notes, and recommended MVP cut line Examples: See examples.md for worked input/output.

Workflow

Step 1: Normalize feature list

For each feature, extract:

• Name and one-sentence description
• User/problem it addresses
• Dependencies on other features
• Estimated effort category (S/M/L/XL if no estimates provided)

If features are vague, ask for clarification before scoring.

Step 2: Select scoring framework

Default: RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort)

State which framework is used and why.

Step 3: Score each feature

For RICE:

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

Step 4: Rank and draw MVP line

• Sort by RICE score descending
• Draw MVP cut line based on stated constraints
• Document features below the line and why deferred

Step 5: Document trade-offs

For top 5 features, note:

• What is sacrificed by prioritizing this
• Dependencies and sequencing requirements
• Risks of deprioritizing alternatives

Step 6: Validate

Run Validation checklist.

Decision Rules

Validation

• Scoring framework explicitly stated
• Every feature has all scoring dimensions filled
• RICE/ICE scores calculated correctly
• Ranked list matches calculated scores
• MVP cut line drawn with rationale
• Top 5 trade-offs documented
• Dependencies noted between features
• No features scored without rationale

Anti-patterns

• HiPPO prioritization — ranking by stakeholder loudest voice without scores.
• Everything is Must — MoSCoW with no Could/Won't items.
• Fake precision — confidence 100% without evidence.
• Ignoring dependencies — ranking independent of sequencing constraints.
• Effort-free ranking — high impact features that take a year ranked first.

Best Practices

• Align Impact scores with north star metric from product vision.
• Lower Confidence when based on assumptions; note what would raise it.
• Include tech debt and infrastructure items in the same framework.
• Re-score after major new evidence (user research, prototype results).
• Document what was explicitly deprioritized and why.

Output Structure

# Feature Prioritization: [Product Name]

## Framework
**Method:** RICE | ICE | MoSCoW
**Rationale:** [why this framework]

## Constraints
- Timeline: [if stated]
- Team: [if stated]

## Scored Features
| Rank | Feature | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort | Score | Rationale |
|------|---------|-------|--------|------------|--------|-------|-----------|

## MVP Cut Line
**Included in MVP:** features #1–#N
**Rationale:** [why this cut]

## Deferred Features
| Feature | Reason deferred |
|---------|-----------------|

## Trade-offs (Top 5)
| Feature | Gain | Sacrifice |
|---------|------|-----------|

## Dependencies
[Feature A] → requires → [Feature B]

Next Skills