Prioritize
Brainstorms strategic solutions when the problem or goal is already clear — generates initiatives, force-ranks them, scores trade-offs with evidence-backed ICE, and draws a cut line with kill criteria. Use when you know the problem and need to decide what to build or pursue first. Not for diagnosing what the problem is (use diagnose) or engineering task lists (use breakdown-tasks). For numeric targets after prioritizing, see plan-funnel; for technical architecture of chosen initiatives, see architect-system.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add hungv47/meta-skills --skill prioritizeAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 13 stars13 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.
SKILL.md
9.2 KB, ~2.1k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Solution Design — Orchestrator
Strategy — Step 2 of 4. Brainstorms strategic solutions to a confirmed problem, surfaces unconventional tactics, and ranks them with evidence-backed scoring against explicit trade-offs.
Core Question: "What's the highest-impact thing we can do about this?"
[Read references/playbook.md [PLAYBOOK] for why this skill exists, the anti-generic test, forced-ranking ceiling, ≤3 cut-line philosophy, churn special case, unconventional-scan rationale, and when NOT to use.]
Critical Gates — Read First
- Every initiative hypothesis MUST name the root cause. Generic growth ideas generate low-impact, unfocused initiatives. If the hypothesis "because" clause doesn't reference the confirmed root cause / problem, the initiative is untethered.
- Force-rank BEFORE scoring — ranking prevents "everything is a 6." The forced ranking sets the ceiling for ICE scores. If you ranked it #1, its ICE should be highest.
- Anti-generic test is mandatory — "would this help ANY company?" Delete the root cause reference from an initiative. If it still makes sense for any company, it's generic. Rewrite.
- ≤3 initiatives above cut line — force the constraint. More than 3 active initiatives means none get full attention. Surface trade-offs honestly; parked initiatives have their turn after the current batch ships.
Before Starting
Apply the before-starting-check [PLAYBOOK]:
- Mode resolution per
references/_shared/mode-resolver.md[PROCEDURE]. Skill isbudget: deep;--fastforces Route B (skip unconventional-agent) with critic gate collapsed to single pass. Hard gate (Critical Gates above) STILL enforced under--fast— safety gates supersede mode-resolver downgrade. Session execution profile (single-vs-multi): inherit perreferences/_shared/execution-policy.md. - Read
implementation-roadmap/canonical-paths.mdif present — verify output path matches canonical inventory (docs/forsvn/artifacts/meta/sketches/prioritize-*.md) and Out-of-Scope path (docs/forsvn/artifacts/meta/out-of-scope/). - Read
.forsvn/index/manifest.json— find the matchingdiagnose-*.md(required) and priorprioritize-*.md(if any). Check freshness (>30 days surfaces a warning). - Run Pre-Dispatch per
references/procedures/pre-dispatch.md[PROCEDURE] — hard-gate enforcement, read order, Cold/Warm Start prompts, staleness check, constraint interview, Out-of-Scope persistence on write all there.
Artifact Contract
- Path:
docs/forsvn/artifacts/meta-prioritize-<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md(flat v2; one per root cause; re-run renames prior with.v[N]) - Lifecycle:
sketch· Review surface:none(decision_state: not_required) - Frontmatter:
skill,version,date,status,stack=meta,review_surface=none - Body sections (cross-stack contract): Phase 1 Initiatives (5-10 + 2-4 unconventional) · Phase 2 (Forced Ranking, ICE Scoring, Decisions) · Cut line · Next Step
- Side effects on PASS: one file per Kill written to
docs/forsvn/artifacts/meta/out-of-scope/[name].md; experience write-back is NONE (initiatives are project-specific, not stable profile state)
Full schemas, consumer map, and cross-stack load-bearing field list: references/procedures/artifact-contract.md [PROCEDURE].
Agent Manifest
| # | Agent | Layer | Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | research-agent | L1 | Root cause validation, case studies via WebSearch, constraint summary |
| 2 | initiative-generator-agent | L1.5 ‖ | 5-10 standard initiatives with Hypothesis/Mechanic/Target Metric/Anti-generic check |
| 3 | unconventional-agent | L1.5 ‖ | 2-4 asymmetric/non-obvious tactics with risk assessments |
| 4 | ranking-agent | L2 seq | Strict 1-through-N forced ranking with reasoning per rank |
| 5 | ice-scoring-agent | L2 seq | Evidence-backed ICE scores + differentiation check (no >2 sharing a total) |
| 6 | cut-line-agent | L2 seq | Proceed/Park/Kill decisions, capacity assessment, Proceed validation |
| 7 | critic-agent | L2 final | 9-point quality gate (rubric + failure routing in agent file). Max 2 rewrite cycles |
Routing + Dispatch
Two routes; chosen at Pre-Dispatch and echoed in the Warm Start confirmation (operator can override):
| Route | When |
|---|---|
| A — Full Analysis (default) | Any non-trivial solution design |
| B — Quick Design | User has candidate approaches; speed > breadth; OR --fast flag |
Entry mode is orthogonal to route: root-cause (default, diagnose-gated) vs ideation (input is a candidate set — discover shortlist, debate output, or a "generate ideas and rank them" ask; the diagnose gate is replaced by a stated ranking anchor and Phase 1 may expand at volume). Resolution + mechanics: references/procedures/pre-dispatch.md § Entry-mode resolution.
Mechanics (route graphs, Layer 1/1.5/2 spawn details, merge step + user feedback gate, critic FAIL routing, single-agent fallback, post-write side effects, Out-of-Scope Persistence file format, chain position, skill deference) live in references/procedures/dispatch-mechanics.md [PROCEDURE]. Load at Layer 1 dispatch entry.
Anti-Patterns
Critic-load reference: references/anti-patterns.md [ANTI-PATTERN]. Re-read before any output ships — 8-pattern catalog (mapped onto the critic's 9-point quality gate in agents/critic-agent.md) plus 2 cross-cutting failures (cross-stack contract drift + out-of-scope persistence skipped).
Durable Rules (protected)
<!-- SLOW_UPDATE_START --> <!-- No pinned rules yet. Populate via the slow-update workflow (see references/slow-update-fence.md). Each pinned rule must (a) be procedural not instance-specific, (b) be earned from a regression or critic-flagged failure, (c) cite the artifact / decision record that justified pinning. --> <!-- SLOW_UPDATE_END -->Completion Status
Every run ends with explicit status:
- DONE — initiatives generated, ICE-scored, ranked, cut-line drawn (≤3 above), kill criteria attached, critic PASS
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — ranking complete but with sizing/impact uncertainty flagged at item level (e.g., effort estimates speculative, ICE inputs from interview not data); OR critic loop cap reached with surfaceable gate failures (pinned at top as Known Issues)
- BLOCKED — root-cause mode:
id:diagnoseunresolvable (no diagnose artifact in the manifest) AND no other root-cause source available; STOP gate per Critical Gate semantics — recommenddiagnosefirst (hard-gated, no INTERVIEW substitute). Ideation mode: no ranking anchor obtainable - NEEDS_CONTEXT — diagnose available but
id:product-contextunresolvable for impact estimation; recommendresearch-icp
Next Step
After cut line is drawn: feed Proceed initiatives forward — plan-funnel (numeric targets per initiative), plan-campaign (campaign briefs for Proceed items), architect-system (technical scoping per Mechanic). Re-run prioritize when new root cause surfaces or after a batch ships.
References
references/playbook.md— why this exists, anti-generic test, ≤3 cut-line philosophy, churn special case, when NOT to usereferences/procedures/{pre-dispatch, dispatch-mechanics, artifact-contract}.md— read-order + hard gates · route graphs + side effects · full contract + consumer mapreferences/_shared/{before-starting-check, mode-resolver, pre-dispatch-protocol, hypothesis-framework, artifact-contract-template}.mdreferences/format-conventions.md— Phase 1 format, ICE/Decisions table schemas, Cut line, Next Step, Out-of-Scope file formatreferences/anti-patterns.md— 8 named anti-patterns + cross-stack drift + out-of-scope persistence skippedreferences/examples/prioritize-walkthrough.md— full Route A walkthrough on a 2-root-cause acquisition + activation case- Data catalogs:
initiative-types.md·ice-scoring-rubric.md·initiative-planning.md·churn-{playbook, cancel-flow-templates, health-score-guide}.md research-skills/CLAUDE.md— stack-level conventions
What ships with it: 35 files
322.8 KB alongside SKILL.md, 6 of them executable
agents/
- critic-agent.md6.5 KB
- cut-line-agent.md5.2 KB
- ice-scoring-agent.md8.1 KB
- initiative-generator-agent.md5.9 KB
- ranking-agent.md5.0 KB
- research-agent.md5.1 KB
- _template.md2.4 KB
- unconventional-agent.md5.5 KB
references/
- anti-patterns.md9.8 KB
- churn-cancel-flow-templates.md5.5 KB
- churn-health-score-guide.md6.0 KB
- churn-playbook.md15.3 KB
- examples/prioritize-walkthrough.md13.3 KB
- format-conventions.md9.6 KB
- ice-scoring-rubric.md7.2 KB
- initiative-planning.md3.8 KB
- initiative-types.md4.9 KB
- playbook.md9.8 KB
- procedures/artifact-contract.md2.7 KB
- procedures/dispatch-mechanics.md11.2 KB
- procedures/pre-dispatch.md10.3 KB
- _shared/artifact-contract-template.md28.8 KB
- _shared/before-starting-check.md9.8 KB
- _shared/execution-policy.md7.0 KB
- _shared/hypothesis-framework.md10.8 KB
- _shared/idea-ranking-core.md3.6 KB
- _shared/mode-resolver.md11.0 KB
- _shared/pre-dispatch-protocol.md20.2 KB
scripts/
- append-loop-result.tsruns7.4 KB
- bootstrap-experience.tsruns3.6 KB
- lib/path-parser.tsruns11.6 KB
- manifest-sync.tsruns33.1 KB
- scaffold-eval-loop.tsruns9.5 KB
- update-quality-dashboard.tsruns9.6 KB
- routing.yaml3.8 KB
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most architecture codebase skills give in ~2.1k tokens
Counted across 811 of the 1,134 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- Ask the user which candidate to explorein 45 of 811, across 15 files
- Apply the deletion test to suspected shallow modulesin 43 of 811, across 15 files
- Read any relevant architecture decision records firstin 31 of 811, across 8 files
- Use exact glossary terms in every suggestionin 30 of 811, across 10 files
- Accept dependencies instead of creating themin 24 of 811, across 5 files
- Include before and after visualisations for each candidatein 24 of 811, across 5 files
- Read the domain glossary before exploringin 24 of 811, across 6 files
- Return results instead of producing side effectsin 23 of 811, across 4 files
- Explore the codebase for shallow modules and frictionin 23 of 811, across 3 files
- Introduce seams only where things varyin 22 of 811, across 3 files
- Reduce the number of methodsin 21 of 811, across 2 files
- Design deep modules with small interfacesin 21 of 811, across 3 files
Said here and by no other author read
- name the root cause for every initiative
- force-rank initiatives before scoring them
- apply the anti-generic test to every initiative
- keep at most three initiatives above the cut line
- generate 5 to 10 standard initiatives
- generate 2 to 4 unconventional tactical initiatives
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.