mvp-scoping

When the user needs to decide what to build, cut, and defer for a first release or minimum viable version of a product or feature.

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/mvp-scoping/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

40%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description communicates a reasonable 'when' trigger scenario but completely lacks specificity about what the skill actually does — no concrete actions, outputs, or methods are mentioned. It also misses key trigger terms like 'MVP', 'scope', and 'prioritization' that users would naturally use. The description reads more like a trigger condition than a full skill description.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Guides feature prioritization using impact/effort scoring, generates a scoped feature list, and produces a build/cut/defer recommendation matrix.'

Include common trigger terms users would naturally say: 'MVP', 'scope', 'prioritize features', 'roadmap', 'what to ship first', 'feature prioritization'.

Restructure to clearly separate 'what' from 'when', e.g., 'Prioritizes features and creates build/cut/defer recommendations for product scoping. Use when the user needs to decide what to include in an MVP, first release, or minimum viable version.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description does not list any concrete actions (e.g., 'prioritize features', 'create a feature matrix', 'score requirements'). It only vaguely references deciding what to 'build, cut, and defer' without specifying what the skill actually does or produces.	1 / 3
Completeness	The description addresses 'when' (deciding what to build/cut/defer for a first release or MVP) but fails to explain 'what' the skill actually does — it never describes the concrete actions, outputs, or methodology the skill provides. The 'when' is present but the 'what' is essentially missing.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes some relevant natural terms like 'first release', 'minimum viable', 'build, cut, and defer' that users might say. However, it misses common variations like 'MVP', 'scope', 'prioritization', 'feature prioritization', 'roadmap', or 'backlog grooming'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The focus on MVP scoping and first-release decisions provides some distinctiveness, but the lack of concrete actions means it could overlap with general product management, roadmapping, or prioritization skills.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

77%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This is a strong, actionable skill with a clear workflow and concrete output format. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity — it explains some concepts Claude already knows (MoSCoW basics, what an MVP is) and the 'When to Use' section is overly detailed. The examples and frameworks sections provide genuine value but the overall document could be tightened by ~20-30% without losing information.

Suggestions

Trim the 'When to Use' section to 1-2 sentences — Claude can infer trigger phrases from the skill description.

Remove or significantly shorten MoSCoW definitions (Must/Should/Could/Won't explanations) since Claude already knows this framework; keep only the project-specific calibration tips like the 40% threshold.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is reasonably well-structured but includes some unnecessary elaboration. The 'When to Use' section lists many trigger phrases that Claude could infer, and the Frameworks section explains MoSCoW definitions that Claude already knows. The scope creep signals section adds value but could be tighter.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides highly concrete, actionable guidance: a specific hypothesis template format, explicit table structures for output, clear MoSCoW classification criteria (e.g., 'if more than 40% of features are Must Have, your bar is too low'), specific forcing functions ('if we could only build 3 features'), and two worked examples showing expected input/output.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The 7-step workflow is clearly sequenced with logical dependencies. Step 6 includes an explicit validation checkpoint ('if they exceed the available timeline by more than 20%, force-rank and demote'), creating a feedback loop. The risk-first sequencing principle adds another validation layer. For a non-destructive advisory skill, this level of workflow clarity is excellent.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill references related skills (prd-writing, roadmap-planning, user-research-synthesis) which is good navigation. However, the content is somewhat monolithic — the Frameworks section, Output Format, and Examples could potentially be split into referenced files given the overall length. The inline content is well-organized with headers but the file is long for a single SKILL.md.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: shawnpang/startup-founder-skills
Commit: 4ad31b4

Reviewed: 7 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.