agentleFS
Sign inStart free
vindreshsinghvindreshsingh/engineering-skills/skills/product-grooming/SKILL.md

product-grooming

Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Runs backlog refinement before sprint planning — clarify stories, split epics, write acceptance criteria, estimate, and confirm Definition of Ready. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need cross-team grooming with Product, Engineering, Architecture, and QA.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Add testable acceptance criteria per story

    line 56
  2. Distinctive:

    Ready: only when all true:

    line 68
  3. Distinctive:

    Use grooming checklist alongside this process.

    line 86

≈ “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

Product Grooming

Sprint planning fails when stories are vague. Grooming is the ceremony that makes backlog items dev-ready — user story, testable acceptance criteria, rough estimate, dependencies, and a Ready / Not ready verdict — before anyone commits capacity.

This skill is the process behind the product-grooming agent. It synthesizes team voices; it does not replace product-manager, architects, or QA.

Pairs with [[spec-first]] for AC quality, [[work-planning]] for estimates and dependencies, [[idea-shaping]] for still-vague epics, [[product-brief]] when stakeholder alignment is missing, and [[interface-design]] when API/schema boundaries need early agreement.

When to Use

  • Backlog refinement session before the next sprint
  • Epic too large — needs splitting into sprint-sized stories
  • Stories lack acceptance criteria or estimates
  • Same items keep reappearing ungroomed sprint after sprint
  • Cross-team alignment needed (product, eng, arch, QA)

Skip when items are already sprint-ready with AC, estimates, and no blocking questions.

Process

1. Set the session frame

  • Goal: Which sprint is this grooming for? (usually next)
  • Timebox: 60–90 minutes; 5–8 stories max
  • Inputs: Current backlog, PRD/epics, carry-over from last grooming

2. Per backlog item — walk team voices

For each epic or story, answer these questions (synthesize; do not guess):

VoiceQuestion
ProductWhy this? Priority? In/out of scope this sprint?
BusinessBusiness rules clear? Domain edge cases?
ArchitectureFeasible? Boundaries? Major dependencies?
Team LeadTask count? Rough dev days? Blockers?
Eng ManagerFits capacity? Calendar realistic?
QAAC testable? Happy + unhappy paths?
SecurityPII, authz, abuse? Early red flags?

Open questions get an owner and due date — never assume an answer.

3. Clarify and split ([[spec-first]])

  • Rewrite: As a … I want … so that …
  • Add testable acceptance criteria per story
  • Split if too large — must fit one sprint slice
  • Mark out of scope explicitly

4. Estimate and sequence ([[work-planning]])

  • Rough estimate (days or points) with stated assumptions
  • Dependencies: schema → API → UI, flags, migrations
  • Flag spikes before commitment if unknowns remain

5. Definition of Ready gate

Ready only when all true:

  • User story + testable AC
  • No blocking open questions (or spike scheduled)
  • Rough estimate with assumptions
  • Dependencies identified
  • Priority confirmed
  • QA confirms AC are testable

Mark each item Ready or Not ready with what's missing.

6. Close the session

  • Prioritized list for sprint planning
  • Open questions with owners
  • Deferred items with reason
  • Hand off to scrum-master and engineering-manager

Use grooming checklist alongside this process.

Common Rationalizations

  • "We'll figure it out in the sprint" — Ungroomed stories become mid-sprint surprises.
  • "Only product needs to attend" — Engineering and QA discover impossibilities late.
  • "Estimates can wait" — Sprint planning without estimates is guessing.
  • "One big epic is fine" — Split in grooming, not on day 8.

Red Flags

  • Stories enter sprint planning without AC
  • Open questions have no owner
  • Estimates without assumptions
  • Grooming becomes deep solution design — defer LLD to architects
  • Same stories groomed repeatedly with no progress toward Ready

Verification

  • Every discussed item has Ready / Not ready verdict
  • Ready items have story, AC, estimate, dependencies, priority
  • Not ready items list what's missing and who owns it
  • Session notes captured for sprint planning
  • No story committed with unresolved blocking questions

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.

Check your setup, free