agentsclimarketplace

Prioritization

Skill viktorbezdek/skillstack/prioritization/skills/prioritization

Skills I use and develop to deliver better outcomes faster and with less effort.

Install
npx -y skills add viktorbezdek/skillstack --skill prioritization

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 10 stars10 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

Apply RICE, MoSCoW, ICE, and effort-impact frameworks to rank options and decide what to work on next. Use when the user asks to prioritize a backlog, rank features, decide what to build first, apply RICE or MoSCoW scoring, cut scope, or compare items by effort vs impact. NOT for defining success metrics or OKRs (use outcome-orientation). NOT for making a strategic bet under uncertainty (use strategic-decision workflow).

SKILL.md

4.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Prioritization

Make better decisions about what to do first.

When to use this skill

  • Scoring features or initiatives to decide quarterly priorities
  • Categorizing requirements as Must/Should/Could/Won't for a release
  • Creating effort-impact matrices for sprint planning
  • Defending prioritization decisions to stakeholders with data
  • Auditing existing prioritization for bias (HiPPO, recency, squeaky wheel)
  • Choosing between RICE, ICE, MoSCoW, or effort-impact for a specific situation

When NOT to use this skill

  • Defining OKRs or success metrics → use outcome-orientation
  • Assessing project risks → use risk-management
  • Making strategic bets under deep uncertainty → use strategic-decision workflow
  • Stakeholder analysis for whose input to weight → use persona-mapping

Framework selection decision tree

Do you have reach data (users affected per quarter)?
  YES → Do you need quantitative rigor for stakeholder defense?
    YES → RICE (most defensible, separates reach/impact/confidence)
    NO  → Effort-Impact matrix (quick visual sort)
  NO  → Do you need release scoping with capacity constraints?
    YES → MoSCoW (60% rule prevents scope creep)
    NO  → ICE (lightweight, works with subjective scores only)

Using more than one? They complement each other:
  RICE or ICE for quarterly prioritization
  MoSCoW for release scoping
  Effort-Impact for sprint-level quick wins

RICE Scoring

Reach x Impact x Confidence / Effort

FactorDescriptionScale
ReachUsers affected per quarterNumber
ImpactEffect on goal0.25-3
ConfidenceCertainty level50-100%
EffortPerson-monthsNumber
Score = (R x I x C) / E

Impact Scale

  • 3 = Massive
  • 2 = High
  • 1 = Medium
  • 0.5 = Low
  • 0.25 = Minimal

MoSCoW Method

PriorityMeaningGuideline
MustRequired for successNon-negotiable
ShouldImportant but not vitalInclude if possible
CouldNice to haveIf time permits
Won'tNot this timeExplicitly excluded

Rule: Must = 60% max of effort

ICE Scoring

FactorDescriptionScale
ImpactPotential value1-10
ConfidenceCertainty1-10
EaseSimplicity1-10
Score = (I + C + E) / 3

Effort-Impact Matrix

HIGH IMPACT
     |
 BIG |  QUICK
BETS |  WINS
     |
-----+------ LOW EFFORT
     |
MONEY|  FILL
PITS |  INS
     |
LOW IMPACT

Priority order: Quick Wins -> Big Bets -> Fill Ins -> Avoid Money Pits

Prioritization Template

## Item: [Name]

### RICE Score
| Factor | Value | Notes |
|--------|-------|-------|
| Reach | [num] | [who] |
| Impact | [0.25-3] | [why] |
| Confidence | [%] | [evidence] |
| Effort | [PM] | [breakdown] |
| **Score** | [calc] | |

### Decision
Priority: [High/Med/Low]
Rationale: [reasoning]

Anti-Patterns

Common prioritization failures

  1. HiPPO (Highest Paid Person's Opinion) — the most senior person's preference wins regardless of impact data. Counter: present RICE comparison data; if overridden, document the override reason explicitly.
  2. Recency bias — the latest request displaces long-planned high-impact work. Counter: score every request before adding to backlog; compare new request score against current top items.
  3. Squeaky wheel — the loudest customer gets prioritized, not the most impacted segment. Counter: weight by reach data, not volume of complaints.
  4. Sunk cost fallacy — continuing a project because of past investment. Counter: re-score with only remaining effort and remaining impact; past investment is irrelevant to forward-looking decisions.
  5. Confidence inflation — scoring 90% confidence on everything, eliminating it as a differentiator. Counter: calibrate — 90% = strong evidence (A/B test, customer data), 70% = reasonable belief, 50% = intuition only.
  6. All Must-haves — MoSCoW with 15 "Must" items exceeding capacity. Counter: enforce the 60% rule; force-rank within Must and demote the lowest.
  7. RICE without data — guessing all values produces opinions with math, not defensible scores. Counter: switch to ICE (designed for subjective scoring) or invest in analytics before RICE.
  8. Strategic override without documentation — overriding RICE for a key account is sometimes correct, but undocumented overrides erode trust in the framework. Always write down why.

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most roadmap strategy skills give

Counted across 591 of the 672 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06

  • read product marketing context before asking questionsin 21 of 591, across 10 files
  • base price on perceived value, not costin 15 of 591, across 4 files
  • compact after finalizing a planin 14 of 591, across 9 files
  • differentiate tiers using features, limits, or supportin 14 of 591, across 3 files
  • use Van Westendorp to find acceptable price rangein 13 of 591, across 2 files
  • use MaxDiff to identify highly valued featuresin 13 of 591, across 2 files
  • map topics to buyer journey stagesin 12 of 591, across 6 files
  • Extract domain capabilities and classify subdomainsin 11 of 591, across 1 file
  • Define bounded contexts around consistency and ownershipin 11 of 591, across 1 file
  • Establish a ubiquitous language glossary and anti-termsin 11 of 591, across 1 file
  • Capture context boundaries in ADRs before implementationin 11 of 591, across 1 file
  • Open the strategic design template if neededin 11 of 591, across 1 file

Said here and by no other author read

  • limit MoSCoW must-haves to 60% of effort
  • order effort-impact matrix quadrants as specified
  • score every new request before adding to backlog
  • re-score sunk cost projects using remaining effort only
  • calibrate confidence based on available evidence
  • switch to ICE when lacking quantitative data

Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.