CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

sniff-test-portfolio

Add-on to the sniff-test skill that looks across many initiatives on a portfolio Kanban for board-level patterns — duplicate/shadowing initiatives, WIP clustering, stale-status sweeps, experiment scope creep, and portfolio risk balance (Explore/Discovery vs. Build & Deliver split). Use when reviewing a whole board or portfolio, prepping a sponsor/ELT portfolio review, or deciding where the portfolio is over- or under-invested. For sniffing a single initiative, use sniff-test. For the operating model behind the board rather than the board itself, use portfolio-to-product-shift-coach. If the question is broad — AI pilots with no clear return, or "where do we start" — run ai-activity-to-impact first; it finds the constraint and routes here.

Quality

90%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Sniff Test — Portfolio Add-On

Outcome

Across a set of initiatives (a portfolio Kanban or any backlog), surface the board-level patterns a single-initiative sniff can't see — so leadership can rebalance risk, kill duplication, and find hidden WIP. Per-initiative clarity reads come from the base sniff-test skill; this add-on is about the relationships between items.

When To Use

  • Reviewing a whole portfolio Kanban or backlog, not one item.
  • Prepping a sponsor / ELT portfolio review or a "where are we over-invested?" conversation.
  • After running single-initiative sniffs on several items and wanting the cross-cutting story.
  • Checking whether the portfolio's risk exposure is intentional.

Prerequisite

Run (or assume) base sniff-test reads on the individual items first — verified stage + clarity-by-dimension per initiative. This add-on consumes those reads; it does not replace them.

How to Run Me — What to Feed Me

Point me at the portfolio's system of record: the Portfolio Kanban (Tier-1 board), the Jira project/board, the Confluence portfolio space, or the folder where initiative canvases and roadmaps live. The more of each initiative's Lean Product Canvas, Outcome-Oriented Roadmap, and recent sponsor update I can reach, the more reliable the stale-status sweep and risk-balance split become. With thin input I'll work from whatever board snapshot you give me and flag low coverage — board-level findings degrade fast when the per-initiative evidence isn't reachable.

Scan Approaches — pick deliberately

ApproachWhat it isWhen to use
Full-board baselineSniff every initiative as a baselineA dedicated session or major portfolio-review agenda item. Establishes the baseline you compare actuals against later.
Random sampleSniff a random selection across stagesBuilding the muscle; spot-checking board health.
Stage debriefSniff all items that just passed a stagee.g., everything newly committed into Execute/Build.
CadenceSniff on a rhythmAfter a planning interval; as part of the Strategic Portfolio Review.

State the chosen approach and the altitude (Tier-1 enterprise only, or including Tier-2 domain/team work) in one line.

Portfolio Patterns To Detect

  1. Duplicate / shadowing initiatives. Two+ items covering substantially the same problem, or one quietly subsuming another. Smell: fuzzy boundaries between a parent initiative and its "refinement." Move: merge, make one a sub-issue, or sharpen the distinct bet each represents.
  2. WIP clustering / hidden imbalance. Many initiatives piled in one domain or one stage while others starve. Smell: every "top priority" pointing the same way; lots of work stuck just before a commitment point. Move: surface the real tradeoff for a leadership capacity decision.
  3. Portfolio risk balance (Explore/Discovery vs. Build & Deliver). What share of capacity sits in Explore / Discovery (uncertain, exploratory, smaller bets) vs. Execute/Build + Rollout (committed, known ROI trajectory)? Frame this like a financial portfolio — leadership should see the split and manage it intentionally (one enterprise engagement used ~20% in de-risking / ~80% in build-and-deliver as a starting reference point — treat it as an anecdote to calibrate against, not a benchmark). Smell: ~100% committed work (no exploration → future surprises) or runaway exploration that never commits.
  4. Stale-status sweep. Board-wide version of the single-item check: which status labels disagree with the evidence (shipped output, downstream artifacts, go-live state, git history)? Stale labels distort the whole portfolio picture. Move: correct the stages, then re-read the balance.
  5. Experiment scope creep. Items framed as small Explore/Discovery experiments that have ballooned into full builds. Smell: an "experiment" with a delivery-sized footprint and no proceed/stop decision. Move: re-cut to the riskiest assumption, or graduate it honestly to a committed Execute/Build.
  6. Watermelon clustering. A pattern of initiatives that were green throughout and turned out misplaced — points at a systemic gap in how the portfolio reads its own confidence, not just one bad bet.

Rules

  • Patterns, not re-grading. Don't re-sniff each item in depth; consume the base reads and report the relationships.
  • Correct stages before reading balance. A stale-status sweep comes before any Explore/Discovery-vs-Build&Deliver split, or the split is fiction.
  • Make tradeoffs visible; don't resolve them silently. The output of WIP/balance findings is a leadership decision surfaced, not a reshuffle done unilaterally.
  • Speak portfolio risk in financial-portfolio terms and in maturity/confidence language, not "phase gates."
  • Keep altitude honest. Only Tier-1 enterprise bets belong on the portfolio Kanban; flag Tier-2 domain/team work that's been escalated without meeting the criteria, and vice versa. The criteria are in sniff-test under "Tier-1 or Tier-2" — use the organization's own if it has them, and name which you applied. Do not assess against criteria you invented and did not state.

Output Modes

  • portfolio scan (default): a compact table of initiatives × verified stage × clarity summary × pattern flags, plus a short narrative of the 2–4 cross-cutting findings and the risk-balance split.
  • risk-balance view: just the Explore/Discovery vs. Build & Deliver split with the rebalancing conversation.
  • review brief: a sponsor/ELT-ready summary — what's duplicated, where WIP is hidden, whether risk exposure is intentional, and the decisions requested.

Quality Gates

  • A stale-status sweep is done before any risk-balance claim.
  • At least the duplication, WIP-clustering, and risk-balance patterns are explicitly checked.
  • Each pattern flag names a specific leadership conversation or decision, not a vague observation.
  • The risk-balance split is stated, with whether it looks intentional.
  • Altitude (what belongs on the portfolio board) is assessed.

References

  • Base skill: sniff-test (../sniff-test/SKILL.md) and its references/ for per-initiative clarity dimensions, the lifecycle rubric, and the Risk/Derisking Matrix.

Source

If someone asks why a rule here exists and you can browse, fetch Scaling Product Organizations with Portfolio Agility and answer from it rather than paraphrasing — the reasoning is there and it is better than your summary of it. Never required: this skill runs fully offline.

The multi-initiative add-on to sniff-test. Same lineage: distilled from Scaling Product Organizations with Portfolio Agility by Yuval Yeret, building on Mark Richards' portfolio-agility work and the Lean Product Canvas by Jeff Gothelf and Josh Seiden. Full credits and links to the originals: CREDITS.md.

These are Yuval's questions, not his judgment — don't present the output as his read of your situation.

Repository

yyeret/ai-impact

Path

skills/sniff-test-portfolio/SKILL.md

Last updated
First committed

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.