Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

kill-criteria-exit-ramps杀戮标准出口坡道

Agent Skill

kill-criteria-exit-ramps 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

1,151

周安装

47

GitHub Stars

85

下载量

368
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

3

许可证

MIT

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:kill-criteria-exit-ramps(杀戮标准出口坡道)
来源仓库:https://github.com/lyndonkl/claude
仓库路径:skills/kill-criteria-exit-ramps
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/lyndonkl/claude --skill kill-criteria-exit-ramps
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/lyndonkl/claude --skill kill-criteria-exit-ramps

简介

kill-criteria-exit-ramps 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在多种宿主环境中快速定位内容。

  • 适用于根据关键词或任务场景从来源线索中筛选信息的需求。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令安装,需结合原始 README 核验具体用法。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态及是否触发联网或文件操作。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

Kill Criteria & Exit Ramps


Common Patterns

Pattern 1: Upfront Kill Criteria (Before Launch)

When: Starting new project, experiment, or product

Process: (1) Define success metrics ("10% conversion"), (2) Set time horizon ("6 months"), (3) Establish kill criteria ("If <5% after 6 months, kill"), (4) Assign decision rights (specific person), (5) Document formally (signed PRD)

Example: New feature — Success: 20% adoption in 3 months, Kill: <10% adoption, Decision: Product VP makes call

Pattern 2: Go/No-Go Gates (Milestone-Based)

When: Multi-stage projects with increasing investment

Structure: Stage 1 (cheap, concept) → Go/No-Go → Stage 2 (moderate, MVP) → Go/No-Go → Stage 3 (expensive, launch) → Go/No-Go

Example: Gate 1 (4wk, $10k): 15+ customer interviews show interest → GO. Gate 2 (3mo, $50k): 40% weekly active (got 25%) → NO-GO, kill

Benefit: Small investments first, kill before expensive stages

Pattern 3: Trigger-Based Exit Ramps

When: Ongoing projects with uncertain outcomes

Common triggers: Time-based ("not profitable by Month 18"), Metric-based ("churn >8% for 2 months"), Market-based ("competitor launches"), Resource-based ("budget overrun >30%"), Opportunity-based ("better option emerges")

Example: SaaS — Trigger 1: MRR growth <10%/mo for 3 months → Evaluate. Trigger 2: CAC payback >24mo → Evaluate. Trigger 3: Competitor raises >$50M → Evaluate

Note: Triggers prompt evaluation, not automatic kill

Pattern 4: Pivot vs. Kill Decision

When: Project isn't working as planned — should you pivot or kill?

Framework:

Pivot if:

  • Core insight is valid but execution is wrong
  • Customer pain is real, solution is wrong
  • Market exists, go-to-market is wrong
  • Learning rate is high (discovering new insights rapidly)
  • Resource burn is sustainable (not desperation mode)

Kill if:

  • No customer pain (nice-to-have, not must-have)
  • Market too small (can't sustain business)
  • Burn rate too high relative to progress
  • Team doesn't believe in vision
  • Better opportunities available (opportunity cost)
  • Regulatory/legal blockers

Example: Mobile app with low engagement

  • Situation: Launched fitness app, 10k downloads, 5% weekly active (target was 40%)
  • Pivot option: Interviews reveal users want meal tracking not workout tracking → Pivot to nutrition app
  • Kill option: Users don't care about fitness tracking at all, market saturated → Kill, reallocate team

Decision: Pivot if hypothesis valid but execution wrong. Kill if hypothesis invalid.

Pattern 5: Portfolio Kill Criteria (Multiple Projects)

When: Managing portfolio of projects, need to kill some to focus

Process:

  1. Rank by expected value: ROI, strategic fit, resource efficiency
  2. Define minimum threshold: "Top 70% of portfolio gets resources"
  3. Kill bottom 30%: Projects below threshold, regardless of sunk cost
  4. Reallocate resources: Winners get resources from killed projects

Example: Company with 10 projects, capacity for 7

  • Rank by: (Expected Revenue × Probability of Success) / Resource Cost
  • Kill: Projects ranked #8, #9, #10 (even if they're "almost done")
  • Reallocate: Engineers from killed projects to top 3

Principle: Opportunity cost matters more than sunk cost. "Almost done" doesn't justify continuing if better alternatives exist.

Pattern 6: Sunk Cost Trap Avoidance

When: Team resists killing project due to past investment

Technique: Pre-mortem inversion

  1. Ask: "If we were starting today with zero investment, would we start this project?"
  2. If answer is "No" → Kill (sunk costs are irrelevant)
  3. If answer is "Yes, but differently" → Pivot
  4. If answer is "Yes, exactly as-is" → Continue

Example: Failed enterprise sales push

  • Situation: 18 months, $2M spent, 2 customers (need 50 for viability)
  • Inversion: "If starting today, would we pursue enterprise sales?" → "No, we'd focus on self-serve SMB"
  • Decision: Kill enterprise sales, pivot to SMB (sunk $2M is irrelevant)

Trap: "We've invested so much, we can't quit now" → This is sunk cost fallacy Escape: Only future costs and benefits matter. Past is gone.


Workflow

Use this structured approach when defining or applying kill criteria:

□ Step 1: Define success metrics and time horizon
□ Step 2: Establish objective kill criteria
□ Step 3: Assign decision rights and governance
□ Step 4: Set milestone gates or trigger points
□ Step 5: Document formally (signed agreement)
□ Step 6: Monitor metrics regularly
□ Step 7: Evaluate at gates/triggers
□ Step 8: Execute kill decision (if triggered)

Step 1: Define success metrics and time horizon (details) Specify quantifiable success criteria (e.g., "20% conversion") and evaluation period (e.g., "6 months post-launch").

Step 2: Establish objective kill criteria (details) Set numeric thresholds that trigger stop decision (e.g., "If <10% conversion after 6 months"). Make criteria objective, not subjective.

Step 3: Assign decision rights and governance (details) Name specific person who makes kill decision. Define escalation process. Avoid "team consensus" (leads to paralysis).

Step 4: Set milestone gates or trigger points (details) For multi-stage projects: define go/no-go gates. For ongoing projects: define triggers that prompt evaluation.

Step 5: Document formally (details) Write kill criteria in PRD, project charter, or investment memo. Get stakeholders to sign/approve before launch (prevents moving goalposts).

Step 6: Monitor metrics regularly (details) Track metrics weekly/monthly. Dashboard with kill criteria thresholds clearly marked. Automate alerts when approaching thresholds.

Step 7: Evaluate at gates/triggers (details) When gate or trigger hit, conduct formal evaluation. Use pre-mortem inversion: "Would we start this today?" Decide: continue, pivot, or kill.

Step 8: Execute kill decision (details) If kill triggered: communicate decision, wind down project, reallocate resources, conduct postmortem. Execute quickly (avoid zombie projects).


Guardrails

1. Set Kill Criteria Before Launch (Not After)

Danger: Defining kill criteria after project starts leads to moving goalposts

Guardrail: Write kill criteria in initial project document, before emotional/financial investment. Get stakeholder sign-off.

Red flag: "We'll figure out when to stop as we go" — this leads to sunk cost trap

2. Make Criteria Objective (Not Subjective)

Danger: Subjective criteria ("team feels it's not working") are easy to ignore

Guardrail: Use quantifiable metrics (numbers, dates, milestones). "5% conversion" not "low adoption". "6 months" not "reasonable time".

Test: Could two people independently evaluate criteria and reach same conclusion? If not, too subjective.

3. Assign Clear Decision Rights

Danger: "Team decides" or "we'll discuss" leads to paralysis (everyone has sunk cost)

Guardrail: Name specific person who makes kill decision. Define what data they need. Escalation path for overrides.

Example: "Product VP makes kill decision based on 6-month metrics. Can be overridden only by CEO with written justification."

4. Don't Move the Goalposts

Danger: When kill criteria approached, team lowers bar or extends timeline

Guardrail: Kill criteria are fixed at launch. Changes require formal process (written justification, senior approval, new document).

Red flag: "Let's give it another 3 months" when 6-month criteria not met

5. Sunk Costs Are Irrelevant

Danger: "We've invested $2M, can't stop now" — sunk cost fallacy

Guardrail: Use pre-mortem inversion: "If starting today with $0 invested, would we do this?" Only future matters.

Principle: Past costs are gone. Only question: "Is future investment better here or elsewhere?"

6. Kill Quickly (Avoid Zombie Projects)

Danger: Projects that should be killed linger, draining resources ("zombie projects")

Guardrail: Kill decision → immediate wind-down. Announce within 1 week, reallocate team within 1 month.

Red flag: Project in "wind-down" for >3 months — this is zombie mode, not killing

7. Opportunity Cost > Sunk Cost

Danger: Continuing project because "almost done" even if better opportunities exist

Guardrail: Portfolio thinking. Ask: "Is this the best use of these resources?" If not, kill even if 90% done.

Principle: Opportunity cost of *not* pursuing better option often exceeds benefit of finishing current project

8. Postmortem, Don't Blame

Danger: Kill decisions seen as "failure", teams avoid them

Guardrail: Normalize killing projects. Celebrate disciplined stopping. Postmortem focuses on learning, not blame.

Culture: "We killed 3 projects this quarter" = good (freed resources for winners), not bad (failures)


Quick Reference

Kill Criteria Checklist

Before launching project, answer:

  • Success metrics defined? (quantifiable, e.g., "20% conversion")
  • Time horizon set? (e.g., "6 months post-launch")
  • Kill criteria established? (e.g., "If <10% conversion after 6 months, kill")
  • Decision rights assigned? (specific person, not "team")
  • Documented formally? (in PRD, signed by stakeholders)
  • Monitoring plan? (who tracks, how often, dashboard)
  • Wind-down plan? (how to kill if criteria triggered)

Go/No-Go Gate Template

GateInvestmentTimelineSuccess CriteriaDecision
Gate 1: Concept$10k4 weeks15+ customer interviews showing strong interestGO / NO-GO
Gate 2: MVP$50k3 months40% weekly active users (50 beta users)GO / NO-GO
Gate 3: Launch$200k6 months10% conversion, <$100 CACGO / NO-GO

Pivot vs. Kill Decision Framework

FactorPivotKill
Customer painReal but solution wrongNo pain, nice-to-have
Market sizeLarge enoughToo small
Learning rateHigh (new insights)Low (stuck)
Burn rateSustainableToo high
Team beliefBelieves with changesDoesn't believe
Opportunity costPivot is best optionBetter options exist

Resources

Navigation to Resources

  • Templates: Kill criteria document, go/no-go gate template, pivot/kill decision framework, wind-down plan
  • Methodology: Sunk cost psychology, portfolio management, decision rights frameworks, postmortem processes
  • Rubric: Evaluation criteria for kill criteria quality (10 criteria)

Related Skills

  • expected-value: For quantifying opportunity cost of continuing vs. killing
  • hypotheticals-counterfactuals: For pre-mortem analysis ("what if we had killed earlier?")
  • decision-matrix: For comparing continue/pivot/kill options
  • postmortem: For learning from killed projects
  • portfolio-roadmapping-bets: For portfolio-level kill decisions

Examples in Context

Example 1: Startup Feature Kill

Context: SaaS launched "Advanced Analytics", kill criteria: <15% adoption after 3 months

Result: 12% adoption → Killed feature, reallocated 2 engineers to core. Saved 6 months maintenance.

Example 2: Enterprise Sales Pivot

Context: B2B SaaS, pivot trigger: <10 customers by Month 12

Result: 7 customers → Pivoted to self-serve SMB. Hit 200 SMB customers in 6 months, 4× faster growth.

Example 3: R&D Portfolio Kill

Context: 8 R&D projects, capacity for 5. Ranked by EV/Cost: A(3.5), B(2.8), C(2.5), D(2.1), E(1.8), F(1.5), G(1.2), H(0.9)

Decision: Killed F, G, H despite F being "80% done". Top 3 projects shipped 4 months earlier.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Claude Code

26.92%
按下载量换算99

Gemini CLI

23.54%
按下载量换算87

Antigravity

19.26%
按下载量换算71

windsurf

12.5%
按下载量换算46

OpenCode

7.72%
按下载量换算28

github-copilot

3.68%
按下载量换算14

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills