prioritization
Skill136 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
A comprehensive prioritization skill for product managers to evaluate features, initiatives, and tasks using proven frameworks. This skill helps PMs make data-driven decisions by applying the right framework for their specific context. All outputs are provided in clean, tabular format for easy sharing with stakeholders. Use this skill when you need to: - Prioritize a product roadmap - Decide which features to build next - Allocate team resources across initiatives - Make tradeoff decisions between competing priorities - Communicate priorities…
9 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Adelie-Squad/solosquadtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- vijaysuperpositionist/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- zpower426/pmpowerstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- The-Utopia-Studio/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- ysskrishna/ai-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- nahid-sparktales/agent-dispatchertheir own version, first seen Sep 21, 2026
Other versions9 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- sruthir28/pm-claude-skills★ 2100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 8
- nahid-sparktales/agent-dispatcher★ 59same name
- Adelie-Squad/solosquad★ 25same name
- ysskrishna/ai-agent-skills★ 20same name
- The-Utopia-Studio/skills★ 6same name
- hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-skills★ 4same name
- hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension★ 1same name
- vijaysuperpositionist/skills★ 0same name
- zpower426/pmpowers★ 0same name
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 repository14 other files it gives its agents.
- ai-use-case-scorerSkill
- decision-memo-builderSkill
- deck-pipelineSkill
- hypothesis-treeSkill
- issue-tree-builderSkill
- mckinsey-chartsSkill
- mckinsey-criticSkill
- meeting-prep-kitSkill
- scpr-frameworkSkill
- stakeholder-mapSkill
- storyline-builderSkill
- synthesisSkill
- top-down-memoSkill
- workshop-designerSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
17 rules. 0 are common, 17 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
17
Distinctive
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 11
Use this skill when you need to:
- Distinctive: line 24
When to use: When you have quantitative data and want an objective score
- Distinctive: line 50
When to use: When you need quick visual prioritization or have limited data
- Distinctive: line 90
When to use: When technical complexity is a key factor
- Distinctive: line 114
When to use: When you have custom criteria important to your context
- Distinctive: line 167
If you say "I don't have reach estimates," Claude will ask:
- Distinctive: line 234
When using this skill, Claude must:
- Distinctive: line 243
Ask 2-3 clarifying questions to gather context, OR
- Distinctive: line 246
Use ranges for uncertain estimates (e.g., "1000-2000 users" not "1500")
- Distinctive: line 264
Ask Claude to explain framework selection
- Distinctive: line 270
Use complex frameworks when simple ones work
- Distinctive: line 272
Treat any framework as the final answer (they're decision aids)
- Distinctive: line 333
Alternative to consider: After Slack, explore general API access - might serve both custom fields AND specialized view needs.
- Distinctive: line 417
Analytics dashboard: if you need revenue/usage insights NOW
- Distinctive: line 418
Automated testing: if you need to improve long-term velocity
- Distinctive: line 495
Before committing to these priorities, validate:
- Distinctive: line 529
Check analytics: What % of customers have added a second user?
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
PM Prioritization Framework
A comprehensive prioritization skill for product managers to evaluate features, initiatives, and tasks using proven frameworks.
Overview
This skill helps PMs make data-driven decisions by applying the right framework for their specific context. All outputs are provided in clean, tabular format for easy sharing with stakeholders.
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when you need to:
- Prioritize a product roadmap
- Decide which features to build next
- Allocate team resources across initiatives
- Make tradeoff decisions between competing priorities
- Communicate priorities to stakeholders
Frameworks Included
1. RICE Scoring
When to use: When you have quantitative data and want an objective score
Best for: Feature prioritization, roadmap planning with multiple stakeholders
Requires: Estimates for reach, impact, confidence, and effort
Formula: (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort
Components:
- Reach: How many users/customers affected in a time period
- Impact: Effect per person (Minimal=0.25, Low=0.5, Medium=1, High=2, Massive=3)
- Confidence: Estimate confidence (50%, 80%, 100%)
- Effort: Person-months required
Output Format:
| Feature | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort (PM) | RICE Score | Rank |
|---------|-------|--------|------------|-------------|------------|------|
| Feature A | 5000 | 2.0 | 100% | 3.0 | 3333 | 1 |
| Feature B | 3000 | 1.0 | 80% | 2.0 | 1200 | 2 |2. Impact/Effort Matrix (2×2)
When to use: When you need quick visual prioritization or have limited data
Best for: Sprint planning, quick decisions, getting team alignment
Requires: Relative assessment of impact and effort (High/Low or Small/Medium/Large)
Quadrants:
- Quick Wins (High Impact, Low Effort) → Do First
- Big Bets (High Impact, High Effort) → Plan & Resource
- Fill-Ins (Low Impact, Low Effort) → Do When Available
- Money Pit (Low Impact, High Effort) → Avoid/Deprioritize
Output Format:
| Item | Impact | Effort | Quadrant | Priority | Recommendation |
|------|--------|--------|----------|----------|----------------|
| Feature A | High | Low | Quick Win | 1 | Ship this sprint |
| Feature B | High | High | Big Bet | 2 | Plan for Q2 |
| Feature C | Low | Low | Fill-In | 3 | If time permits |
| Feature D | Low | High | Money Pit | 4 | Defer indefinitely |Visual Matrix:
LOW EFFORT HIGH EFFORT
┌─────────────────┬─────────────────┐
HIGH │ QUICK WINS │ BIG BETS │
IMPACT │ • Feature A │ • Feature B │
│ • Feature C │ │
├─────────────────┼─────────────────┤
LOW │ FILL-INS │ MONEY PIT │
IMPACT │ • Feature D │ • Feature E │
│ │ │
└─────────────────┴─────────────────┘3. Value vs. Complexity
When to use: When technical complexity is a key factor
Best for: Engineering-heavy decisions, technical debt prioritization
Requires: Business value assessment + technical complexity rating
Considers:
- Value: Business value, user value, strategic alignment
- Complexity: Technical complexity, dependencies, risk, maintenance burden
Output Format:
| Item | Business Value | Technical Complexity | Quadrant | Priority |
|------|----------------|---------------------|----------|----------|
| API Upgrade | High | Low | Quick Win | 1 |
| Platform Migration | High | High | Big Bet | 2 |
| UI Polish | Low | Low | Fill-In | 3 |
| Legacy Refactor | Low | High | Money Pit | 4 |4. Weighted Scoring
When to use: When you have custom criteria important to your context
Best for: Strategic initiatives, complex B2B decisions, custom business contexts
Requires: Defined criteria and weights (must total 100%)
Common Criteria Examples:
- Strategic alignment (30%)
- Customer value (25%)
- Revenue potential (20%)
- Effort (15%)
- Risk (10%)
Output Format:
| Feature | Strategic (30%) | Customer (25%) | Revenue (20%) | Effort (15%) | Risk (10%) | Total Score | Rank |
|---------|-----------------|----------------|---------------|--------------|------------|-------------|------|
| Feature A | 9 (2.7) | 8 (2.0) | 7 (1.4) | 9 (1.35) | 8 (0.8) | 8.25 | 1 |
| Feature B | 7 (2.1) | 9 (2.25) | 6 (1.2) | 7 (1.05) | 7 (0.7) | 7.30 | 2 |Note: Numbers in parentheses show weighted contribution
Framework Selection Guide
| Your Situation | Recommended Framework | Why |
| Have quantitative data | RICE | Most objective, data-driven |
| Need quick decision | Impact/Effort Matrix | Visual, fast alignment |
| High technical complexity | Value vs. Complexity | Accounts for engineering reality |
| Custom business criteria | Weighted Scoring | Flexible to your context |
| Early startup, high uncertainty | Impact/Effort Matrix | Works with limited data |
| Enterprise, many stakeholders | RICE or Weighted Scoring | Defensible, systematic |
| Managing technical debt | Value vs. Complexity | Balances business + technical |
How to Use This Skill
Input Format
Provide Claude with:
- List of items to prioritize (features, initiatives, tasks)
- Context (your product, stage, constraints)
- Framework preference (or ask Claude to recommend)
- Available data (estimates, metrics, constraints)
When You Don't Have Data
This is common and okay! Most PMs lack perfect data. Claude can help in two ways:
Option 1: Claude asks clarifying questions If you say "I don't have reach estimates," Claude will ask:
- How many customers have requested this?
- What % of your user base would use this feature?
- Is this a must-have for a specific segment?
Option 2: Claude provides baseline estimates Based on your product context, Claude can suggest reasonable ranges:
- "For B2B SaaS, SSO typically reaches 60-80% of enterprise customers"
- "Mobile adoption for desk-based products: 20-30%, field-based: 70-90%"
- "Search improvements usually have 'High' impact if search is used daily"
Claude will:
- ✅ Explain reasoning behind estimates
- ✅ Use industry benchmarks and patterns
- ✅ Flag high-uncertainty items for validation
- ✅ Give you ranges (e.g., "1000-2000 users") not false precision
- ✅ Mark estimates clearly so you know what to validate
Just tell Claude: "I don't have data for X, can you help estimate?"
Example Prompts
For RICE:
Using the prioritization skill, score these 5 features with RICE:
1. User dashboard redesign
2. Mobile app notifications
3. API rate limiting
4. Advanced search filters
5. Export to CSV
Context: B2B SaaS, 10K users, 3-person eng teamFor Impact/Effort:
Help me prioritize these 8 backlog items using Impact/Effort matrix:
[list items]
I need to decide what to tackle in next sprint.For Framework Recommendation:
I have 12 items to prioritize. Not sure which framework to use.
Context: Early-stage startup, limited data, need to move fast,
high uncertainty. What framework should I use and why?Claude's Output Structure
For every prioritization request, Claude will provide:
- Recommended Framework (with reasoning)
- Prioritized Table (clean, shareable format)
- Key Insights (patterns, trade-offs, gaps)
- Recommendation (what to do next)
- Assumptions to Validate (what Claude assumed, what you should verify)
Output Requirements for Claude
When using this skill, Claude must:
✅ Always use markdown tables for prioritization results ✅ Show calculations for scoring frameworks (RICE, Weighted) ✅ Provide visual matrix for Impact/Effort and Value/Complexity ✅ Include priority ranking (1, 2, 3...) in output tables ✅ List assumptions made that should be validated ✅ Give specific next steps based on the prioritization ✅ Help estimate missing data - When the PM lacks estimates, Claude should:
- Ask 2-3 clarifying questions to gather context, OR
- Provide reasonable baseline estimates based on product type and industry patterns
- Explain reasoning (e.g., "Based on typical B2B SaaS, SSO reaches 70% of enterprise customers")
- Use ranges for uncertain estimates (e.g., "1000-2000 users" not "1500")
- Clearly mark which numbers are estimates vs. provided data
- Flag high-uncertainty items that need validation before decisions
❌ Never use verbose paragraphs for the main prioritization output ❌ Never skip the reasoning for framework selection ❌ Never provide scores without context or explaining the methodology ❌ Never refuse to help due to missing data - provide estimated ranges instead ❌ Never give false precision on estimates (e.g., don't say "exactly 1,247 users")
Tips for Better Results
Do:
- Provide context about your product and constraints
- Share what data you have available
- Mention upcoming deadlines or strategic goals
- Ask Claude to explain framework selection
- Request specific output format if you have preferences
Don't:
- Expect perfect precision with limited data
- Skip validating assumptions with your team
- Use complex frameworks when simple ones work
- Forget to communicate the "why" behind priorities
- Treat any framework as the final answer (they're decision aids)
Example: RICE Scoring Output
Input:
Use RICE to prioritize these 3 features for our project management tool:
1. Gantt chart view
2. Slack integration
3. Custom fields
We have 5K active teams, 4 engineers, targeting enterprise customers.Claude Output:
Framework Recommendation
RICE Scoring - You have user base data (5K teams) and can estimate impact. This gives you defensible, quantitative prioritization for stakeholder discussions.
RICE Analysis
| Feature | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort (PM) | RICE Score | Rank |
| Slack Integration | 4,000 | 2.0 | 100% | 2.0 | 4,000 | 1 |
| Custom Fields | 3,500 | 1.0 | 80% | 2.8 | 1,000 | 2 |
| Gantt Chart | 1,000 | 1.0 | 80% | 4.0 | 200 | 3 |
Calculation Details
Slack Integration:
- Reach: 4,000 teams (80% would use integrations based on enterprise SaaS benchmarks)
- Impact: High (2.0) - Reduces context switching, major workflow improvement
- Confidence: 100% - Clear demand signal from customer requests
- Effort: 2 person-months (standard OAuth + webhook implementation)
- Score: (4000 × 2.0 × 1.0) / 2.0 = 4,000
Custom Fields:
- Reach: 3,500 teams (70% of enterprise users need customization)
- Impact: Medium (1.0) - Enables flexibility but doesn't change core workflow
- Confidence: 80% - Some validation needed on field types required
- Effort: 2.8 person-months (schema changes + UI work)
- Score: (3500 × 1.0 × 0.8) / 2.8 = 1,000
Gantt Chart:
- Reach: 1,000 teams (20% - mainly traditional PM users)
- Impact: Medium (1.0) - Alternative timeline views exist
- Confidence: 80% - Nice-to-have feedback, not urgent requests
- Effort: 4 person-months (complex visualization + interactions)
- Score: (1000 × 1.0 × 0.8) / 4.0 = 200
Key Insights
- Integrations >> Views: Your customers value connecting tools over specialized views
- Effort/Value trade-off: Gantt chart takes 2× the effort of Slack integration for 1/4 the reach
- Enterprise focus: Both top priorities serve enterprise customization needs
Recommendation
Ship Slack integration first (Q1), then custom fields (Q2). Consider pausing Gantt chart until you see demand from a specific high-value segment.
Alternative to consider: After Slack, explore general API access - might serve both custom fields AND specialized view needs.
Assumptions to Validate
- Slack integration effort estimate - confirm with engineering
- 80% integration usage rate - check against similar features
- Custom field requirements - interview 5-10 enterprise customers
- Whether Gantt is must-have for specific verticals (construction, agencies)
Example: Impact/Effort Matrix Output
Input:
Quick prioritization for sprint. Impact/Effort matrix:
1. Fix login bug (affects 5% of users)
2. Add dark mode
3. Improve search performance
4. Build admin analytics dashboard
5. Set up automated testing
6. Add export to PDF
7. Update documentation
8. Refactor payment code
Context: 2-week sprint, 3 developersClaude Output:
Framework Recommendation
Impact/Effort Matrix - You need sprint-level decisions with a fixed team. This gives you quick visual prioritization without needing detailed estimates.
Prioritization Matrix
| Item | Impact | Effort | Quadrant | Priority | Sprint Plan |
| Fix login bug | High | Low | 🎯 Quick Win | 1 | Week 1 (2 days) |
| Improve search | High | Medium | 🎯 Quick Win | 2 | Week 1-2 (4 days) |
| Analytics dashboard | High | High | 📋 Big Bet | 3 | Consider for next sprint |
| Automated testing | High | High | 📋 Big Bet | 4 | Consider for next sprint |
| Update docs | Low | Low | ⏰ Fill-In | 5 | Squeeze in if time |
| Export to PDF | Medium | Medium | ⏰ Fill-In | 6 | Backlog |
| Dark mode | Low | Medium | ❌ Money Pit | 7 | Defer |
| Refactor payment | Low | High | ❌ Money Pit | 8 | Defer (unless buggy) |
Visual Matrix
LOW EFFORT MEDIUM EFFORT HIGH EFFORT
┌──────────────────┬──────────────────────┬─────────────────────┐
│ │ │ │
HIGH │ 🎯 QUICK WINS │ 🎯 QUICK WINS │ 📋 BIG BETS │
IMPACT │ │ │ │
│ • Login bug │ • Search perf │ • Analytics │
│ │ │ • Auto testing │
│ │ │ │
├──────────────────┼──────────────────────┼─────────────────────┤
│ │ │ │
MEDIUM │ │ ⏰ FILL-INS │ │
IMPACT │ │ │ │
│ │ • Export PDF │ │
│ │ │ │
├──────────────────┼──────────────────────┼─────────────────────┤
│ │ │ │
LOW │ ⏰ FILL-INS │ ❌ MONEY PIT │ ❌ MONEY PIT │
IMPACT │ │ │ │
│ • Update docs │ • Dark mode │ • Refactor payment │
│ │ │ │
└──────────────────┴──────────────────────┴─────────────────────┘Sprint Recommendation
Week 1:
- Days 1-2: Fix login bug (Priority 1)
- Days 3-5: Start search performance improvements
Week 2:
- Days 1-3: Complete search performance
- Days 4-5: Update documentation (Fill-In)
Defer to Next Sprint: Choose ONE big bet based on strategic priority:
- Analytics dashboard if you need revenue/usage insights NOW
- Automated testing if you need to improve long-term velocity
Key Insights
- You have 2 quick wins that fit in one sprint - do both
- Both big bets require full sprint commitment - don't split focus
- Dark mode is tempting but medium effort for low impact
- Payment refactor: only prioritize if it's causing bugs
Critical Question to Answer
Login bug affects only 5% of users - Are these high-value customers? If yes, this jumps to absolute top priority. If no, search performance might be more impactful.
Assumptions to Validate
- Login bug: Which customer segment is affected?
- Search performance: Current load time vs. target
- Big bets: Can analytics or testing be broken into smaller chunks?
- Payment refactor: Is there technical debt risk we're missing?
Example: When You Don't Have Data
Input:
Use RICE but I don't have estimates. Help me prioritize:
1. Add webhooks for integrations
2. Dark mode
3. Team collaboration features
4. Performance improvements
Context: Early-stage B2B productivity tool, 200 customers (mostly small businesses),
3 engineers, trying to figure out Q1 prioritiesClaude Output:
Let me help you estimate
I'll provide baseline estimates based on early-stage B2B SaaS patterns. These are educated guesses - you should validate the high-impact items with customer conversations.
RICE Analysis (with estimated ranges)
| Feature | Reach (est.) | Impact | Confidence | Effort (PM) | RICE Score | Rank |
| Webhooks | 60-100 | 2.0 | 60% | 3.0 | 40 | 1 |
| Team features | 80-120 | 2.0 | 70% | 4.0 | 35 | 2 |
| Performance | 150-200 | 1.0 | 80% | 2.0 | 75 | 3 |
| Dark mode | 40-60 | 0.5 | 50% | 1.5 | 13 | 4 |
How I Estimated (Validate These!)
Webhooks:
- Reach: 60-100 customers (30-50%) - Early-stage companies building integrations typically see 30-50% of customers using webhook features. Depends heavily on your positioning (API-first vs. UI-first).
- Impact: High (2.0) - Enables automation and ecosystem, can be deal-maker for technical buyers
- Confidence: 60% - Medium confidence. Check: Are customers asking for specific integrations? That signals real need.
- Effort: 3 PM - Webhook infrastructure + documentation + examples
Team Collaboration:
- Reach: 80-120 customers (40-60%) - Small businesses often start with 1 user, expand to team. Your growth depends on multi-user adoption.
- Impact: High (2.0) - Increases stickiness, drives expansion revenue (per-seat pricing?)
- Confidence: 70% - Higher confidence. B2B tools need team features to grow ACV.
- Effort: 4 PM - Permissions, sharing, team admin, user management
Performance:
- Reach: 150-200 customers (75-100%) - Everyone experiences performance. Prioritize if currently slow.
- Impact: Medium (1.0) - Depends on current state. "Fast enough" vs "frustratingly slow" changes impact.
- Confidence: 80% - High confidence on reach, but is performance actually a problem?
- Effort: 2 PM - Assuming targeted optimizations, not full rewrite
Dark Mode:
- Reach: 40-60 customers (20-30%) - Personal preference feature, not everyone uses
- Impact: Low (0.5) - Nice-to-have, rarely drives decisions
- Confidence: 50% - Low confidence. Check: Are people actually asking for this?
- Effort: 1.5 PM - Theme system + testing across all screens
Key Questions to Answer
Before committing to these priorities, validate:
- Webhooks:
- ❓ Are 5+ customers asking for specific integrations?
- ❓ Would this unlock expansion into technical/engineering buyers?
- ❓ Do you have 1-2 partners ready to integrate?
- Team Features:
- ❓ What % of your 200 customers are multi-user teams today?
- ❓ Are single users asking to bring colleagues?
- ❓ Do you have per-seat pricing ready?
- Performance:
- ❓ What's your current load time? (If <2 seconds, maybe not urgent)
- ❓ Are customers complaining about speed?
- ❓ Would 50% faster actually change behavior?
- Dark Mode:
- ❓ How many explicit requests have you received? (If <10, defer)
Recommendation
Based on estimated ranges:
Ship in Q1:
- Webhooks (if validation shows integration demand)
- Team features (if multi-user adoption is growing)
Validate first:
- Performance: Measure current metrics. Only prioritize if actually slow.
- Dark mode: Defer unless you get 20+ requests
Data you need:
- Survey your 200 customers: "What would make you use this 2x more?"
- Check analytics: What % of customers have added a second user?
- Review support tickets: What are top 5 complaints?
Confidence Levels
🟢 High confidence (70%+): Team features - B2B SaaS needs this to scale 🟡 Medium confidence (50-70%): Webhooks - depends on your market positioning 🔴 Low confidence (<50%): Performance, Dark mode - need data to validate
Version
v1.0 - Four core frameworks (RICE, Impact/Effort, Value/Complexity, Weighted Scoring)
Related Skills
Coming soon:
- Roadmap Planning
- Stakeholder Communication
- Product Strategy
License
MIT License - Use freely, share widely, build upon 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.

