Feature complexity audit
Skill nevitonsantana/adaptive-skills/skills/feature-complexity-audit
Estimate the permanent cost of a feature — cognitive, technical, operational, and governance carry — before the build commitment, producing a complexity scorecard and a reduction recommendation.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add nevitonsantana/adaptive-skills --skill feature-complexity-auditAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- 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.
SKILL.md
4.3 KB, 930 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Overview
Use this skill to make the permanent cost of a feature visible before committing to build. A feature is a bet that consumes complexity forever; this skill estimates that carry across cognitive, technical, operational, and governance dimensions, and recommends the cheapest coherent way to get the value. It produces a coarse, honest scorecard — never a false-precision number.
When to Use
- A feature looks valuable and complexity is becoming the deciding factor.
- Before a
build_nowverdict on anything non-trivial. - When comparing two designs that deliver similar value at different carry.
When NOT to Use
- The change is tiny, local, and obviously cheap.
- Value itself is unresolved (resolve the lever first).
- No scope or dependencies are known yet (nothing to estimate).
Core Moves
- Frame. State the feature and the scope being costed.
- Score four dimensions (each low/medium/high with drivers):
- Cognitive — surface users and the team must hold in their heads.
- Technical — new dependencies, data model, integration, migration surface.
- Operational — support, on-call, runbook, monitoring carry.
- Governance — security, privacy, compliance, accessibility obligations.
- Name reversibility. reversible / partially_reversible / one_way_door, and the mechanisms (flag, cohort, rollback, sunset, migration plan).
- Roll up to a coarse level (low/medium/high) with the dominant driver named.
- Recommend reduction. The smallest scope that keeps the value, or the explicit exception required if the high cost is accepted.
Optional Modules
- Carry-over forecast — Estimate the ongoing yearly cost (support tickets, on-call, doc upkeep), not just the build cost.
- Reduction options — List 1–3 concrete ways to cut permanent cost without killing the value.
- One-way-door check — When reversibility is low, force a technical gate before commit.
Activation Triggers
- Run whenever complexity is the pivotal factor in a worth-doing verdict.
- Use the one-way-door check when reversibility is
one_way_door. - Use reduction options whenever the rolled-up level is
high.
Inputs (minimum)
- Feature, scope, dependencies, UX impacted, operational footprint.
Outputs (minimum)
- A permanent-cost score, risks, and a reduction recommendation — mapping to the
complexity_costandreversibilityfields of the Feature Value Governance Contract. Ahighlevel under abuild_nowverdict requiresdecision.exception_approval.
Expected Output
complexity_scorecard:
feature: <one line>
dimensions:
cognitive: { level: low|medium|high, drivers: <text> }
technical: { level: low|medium|high, drivers: <text> }
operational: { level: low|medium|high, drivers: <text> }
governance: { level: low|medium|high, drivers: <text> }
reversibility:
level: reversible | partially_reversible | one_way_door
mechanisms: [ ... ]
rolled_up_level: low | medium | high
dominant_driver: <text>
reduction_recommendation: <smallest scope that keeps value, or required exception>
uncertainty: <what is hard to estimate>
Verification
- All four dimensions are scored, not just the technical one.
- Reversibility is explicit.
- The recommendation reduces cost or names the exception — it does not hand-wave.
- The level is coarse and honest, not a fake decimal.
Handoff Signals
- A
highlevel under a build verdict → requireexception_approvaland route to human review. - The feature should perhaps not be built at all →
feature-value-governance. - Structural design is the real question →
architecture-review.
Pairs Well With
feature-value-governancearchitecture-reviewpremortem
Anti-patterns
- Scoring only build effort and ignoring forever-carry.
- A precise-looking number that hides deep uncertainty.
- Treating high complexity as an automatic veto, or as no cost at all.
What ships with it: 2 files
2.9 KB alongside SKILL.md
- skill-knowledge-dependency.yaml1.6 KB
- workflow.md1.3 KB