Ai feature go no go
Skill Abhillashjadhav/PM-agent-OS/.claude/skills/ai-feature-go-no-go
Evidence-aware product-management skills and reviewer agents for discovery, strategy, build, launch, and iteration.
npx -y skills add Abhillashjadhav/PM-agent-OS --skill ai-feature-go-no-goAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
3 things to look at
- 29 days oldThe repository was created 29 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Strategy-stage skill: turns an AI-feature idea plus context into a build/kill decision that names the single criterion it turns on. Use when the user asks for a go/no-go, build-or-kill, or ship-worthiness call on an AI or LLM-powered feature — 'should we build AI auto-replies', 'build or kill: LLM search', 'make the call on this AI feature' — or when /pm routes such a request here. Do NOT use for non-AI feature prioritization, for mapping assumptions without deciding (assumption-mapper), for model/vendor selection, or for launch-timing decisions.
SKILL.md
4.8 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
AI Feature Go/No-Go
A decision, not a discussion. The output is GO or NO-GO, and it names the one criterion doing the deciding — everything else is ranked context.
Verification gates (defined first; output is blocked until all pass)
- G1 — Pivot criterion named: the decision states the SINGLE disqualifying (for NO-GO) or qualifying (for GO) criterion it turns on. Five co-equal reasons with no named pivot fails the gate. A conditional GO states its exact condition; "it depends" is not a decision.
- G2 — Non-decisive factors marked: supporting factors are ranked below the pivot and explicitly marked non-decisive. If removing the pivot wouldn't flip the decision, the pivot is wrong — find the real one.
- G3 — No fabricated context: the decision argues from provided context only. No invented compliance rulings, competitor moves, usage benchmarks, or user demand. Arithmetic uses input numbers; anything else is a labeled estimate.
Steps
- Fix the failure surface. What happens when the AI is wrong, who sees it, and can it be caught before harm? Error tolerance × review point is where most AI features live or die — check it first.
- Check the remaining axes, in order: value density (does the feature remove real work — do the arithmetic on volume and FTEs), feasibility at quality bar (can current models meet the tolerance found in step 1), economics (per-unit cost vs. price/margin — route deep dives to roadmap-reality-check), and trust/adoption (will users accept AI in this moment).
- Find the pivot. One axis almost always decides; the rest calibrate. Test it: if this criterion flipped, would the decision flip? If not, it's not the pivot.
- Write the decision. GO / NO-GO / GO-IF (with the exact condition). Then the reversal line: what change in the world or the feature's design would flip this call — a NO-GO on unreviewed output may be a GO with human-in-the-loop, and the output must say that's a different, smaller feature.
- Gate pass. One named pivot (G1), non-decisive factors marked (G2), every contextual claim traceable to input (G3). Fix and re-run; maximum 2 repair loops, then report the failure instead of the output.
Output format
DECISION: NO-GO
PIVOT CRITERION (disqualifying): unreviewed generative output in a regulated,
payments-adjacent support flow with stated near-zero error tolerance. One wrong
auto-sent answer about a payment is an incident, and nothing in the design catches
it before the customer does.
NON-DECISIVE FACTORS (would not flip the decision alone):
- volume: 400 tickets/mo ÷ 1.5 FTE — no capacity crisis to justify the risk [input math]
- CSAT 4.6/5 — protecting a strength, not fixing a weakness
WHAT WOULD FLIP IT: agent-reviewed drafts instead of auto-send (a different, smaller
feature: GO-worthy on the same context) · or error tolerance materially loosening
GATE CHECK: G1 pass (one pivot) · G2 pass · G3 pass
Hard rules
- One pivot criterion, named, always. If two criteria genuinely co-decide, pick the one that fails first in deployment order and note the second as next-in-line — never present an unranked list as a decision.
- Never hedge a decision into meaninglessness. "GO with monitoring and phased rollout" that doesn't name what would disqualify it is not a decision — it's postponed accountability.
- Never invent context to make the call easier. Missing load-bearing context (error tolerance, volume) → ask for it or state the decision is provisional on the named missing fact.
- The reversal line is mandatory. A decision that can't say what would flip it hasn't found its own pivot.
Limitations
- The call is a structured judgment on provided context — it cannot see org politics, roadmap opportunity cost, or strategy fit beyond what the input states.
- Feasibility-at-quality-bar reads current-generation model capability as commonly known; a borderline call deserves a technical spike, and the output says so rather than guessing.
- GO-IF conditions are design requirements, not guarantees the condition is achievable.
- One feature per call; portfolio-level sequencing across many candidate features is roadmap territory.