roadmap-narrative
Skill4 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
Turn a roadmap into a compelling narrative for different audiences — exec, engineering, and customer-facing. Eliminates the copy-paste-reframe cycle. Use when you need to communicate what's coming and why, not just list features.
In this repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- churn-signalSkill
- debateSkill
- decision-briefSkill
- design-an-interfaceSkill
- docxSkill
- impact-sizingSkill
- interview-analysisSkill
- learnSkill
- parallel-prototypeSkill
- pdfSkill
- pptxSkill
- rapid-prototypeSkill
- recallSkill
- sprint-healthSkill
- web-browserSkill
- xlsxSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
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 17
If no input is provided, ask:
- Distinctive: line 20
If input is brief (just feature names), ask ONE follow-up question:
- Distinctive: line 23
Don't ask more than one question.
- Distinctive: line 35
If no time horizon is given, group items into Now / Next / Later based on apparent priority or sequence.
- Distinctive: line 41
Every roadmap has a story.
- Distinctive: line 111
If the roadmap is heavily feature-named ("Add bulk export", "New dashboard widget"), translate feature names into customer outcomes before …
- Distinctive: line 113
Never invent initiatives that weren't in the input.
≈ “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
Roadmap Narrative Skill
Turn a roadmap — however rough — into polished, audience-specific narratives. One input, three outputs.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Accepts:
/roadmap-narrative— Will ask for the roadmap interactively/roadmap-narrative [path/to/roadmap.md]— Read from file/roadmap-narrative [pasted content]— Accept pasted text, table, or bullet list
If no input is provided, ask:
"Paste your roadmap or describe what you're shipping over the next 1-3 quarters. It can be rough — bullet points, a table, or even just a list of feature names. I'll do the rest."
If input is brief (just feature names), ask ONE follow-up question:
"What's the strategic theme tying this roadmap together? What problem are you fundamentally solving for customers this period?"
Don't ask more than one question. Work with what you have.
Phase 1: Parse the Roadmap
Extract from the input:
- Items: Each initiative, feature, or theme
- Time horizon: Now/Next/Later, Q1/Q2/Q3, or whatever structure is given
- Implied theme: What's the common thread across this work?
- Notable gaps: Anything conspicuously absent that stakeholders might ask about?
If no time horizon is given, group items into Now / Next / Later based on apparent priority or sequence.
Phase 2: Identify the Narrative Arc
Every roadmap has a story. Find it:
- Problem arc: "Customers couldn't do X. We're fixing that."
- Platform arc: "We're laying foundations now so we can move fast later."
- Growth arc: "We're doubling down on what's working."
- Catch-up arc: "We're closing the gap on table-stakes functionality."
- Strategic pivot: "We're moving from X to Y."
Name the arc explicitly — it becomes the spine of every version of the narrative.
Phase 3: Generate Three Narratives
Generate all three versions. Each should be self-contained — do not require the reader to have read another version.
Version 1: Executive Summary (100-150 words)
Audience: CPO, CEO, board. Assumes they haven't read anything about this.
Structure:
- The strategic theme — What's the one thing this roadmap is about?
- The customer problem — Why now? What changed?
- The three big bets — What are we actually shipping? (3 items max)
- The outcome — What will be measurably different in 6 months?
Format: Prose, not bullets. Sounds like something you'd say in a meeting, not a status update.
Version 2: Engineering / Team Brief (300-400 words)
Audience: Engineering leads, designers, PMs. They want context and sequencing.
Structure:
- Why this roadmap — The strategic rationale and key decisions made
- Sequencing logic — Why are we doing things in this order?
- Dependencies & risks — What are we betting on? What could derail us?
- How we'll know it's working — Success metrics per initiative (use Amplitude data if available)
- What we're NOT doing — Explicit out-of-scope to prevent scope creep
Format: Mix of prose and bullets. Opinionated. Name trade-offs.
Version 3: Customer-Facing / External (150-200 words)
Audience: Customers, sales, CSMs. They want to know what's coming that helps them.
Structure:
- The customer problem we're solving — Empathetic, outcome-focused
- What's coming — Framed as customer outcomes, not feature names
- Timing — Honest but not committed. Use "coming soon", "this quarter", "later this year"
- Call to action — What should customers do with this info? (Try the beta, talk to their CSM, etc.)
Format: Friendly, non-technical. No internal jargon. Sounds like a product newsletter, not a Jira epic.
Phase 4: Output
Present all three versions back-to-back, clearly labelled.
After presenting, offer:
"Want me to adjust the tone, emphasis, or length on any of these? I can also draft a Confluence page, Slack announcement, or slide deck outline if useful."
Tips
- If the roadmap is heavily feature-named ("Add bulk export", "New dashboard widget"), translate feature names into customer outcomes before writing any version.
- If you spot a strategic gap or incoherence in the roadmap (e.g., two conflicting themes, or a quarter with nothing customer-facing), flag it gently: "One thing I noticed — the Q2 work is all infrastructure with no customer-facing output. Do you want me to flag that in the exec version or omit it?"
- Never invent initiatives that weren't in the input. If the roadmap is thin, say so — don't pad it.
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.

