Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发需要联网github未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

prioritizationprioritization 搜索

Agent Skill

prioritization 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。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

423

周安装

18

GitHub Stars

61

下载量

148
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:prioritization(prioritization 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins
仓库路径:skills/prioritization
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins --skill prioritization
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/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins --skill prioritization

简介

prioritization 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue 和 Pull Request 协作信息,适合跟踪代码变更状态。

  • 适用于需要围绕仓库动态进行任务排序或事项整理的场景,如 Issue 优先级划分。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,建议结合原始 README 了解集成方式。
  • 使用前应确认权限范围,避免触发不必要的网络请求或文件操作。
  • 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

Prioritization

Systematically rank and prioritize requirements, features, backlog items, and initiatives using proven prioritization frameworks. Supports MoSCoW, Kano model, weighted scoring, and value-effort analysis.

What is Prioritization?

Prioritization is the process of determining relative importance and ordering of items to focus resources on what matters most. Effective prioritization balances:

  • Value: Benefit to customers or business
  • Effort: Cost, time, and resources required
  • Risk: Uncertainty and potential downsides
  • Dependencies: Constraints and sequencing

Prioritization Techniques

MoSCoW Method

Categorical prioritization for timeboxed delivery:

CategoryDefinitionGuidance
MustNon-negotiable, required for successWithout these, delivery is a failure
ShouldImportant but not criticalSignificant value, workarounds exist
CouldDesirable if resources permitNice to have, enhances experience
Won'tExplicitly excluded this timeNot now, maybe later

When to Use: Sprint planning, release scoping, MVP definition, timeboxed projects

Rules:

  • Musts should be ~60% of capacity (leave room for unknowns)
  • Won'ts are explicitly stated (not silently dropped)
  • Categories are relative to the timebox, not absolute

Kano Model

Customer satisfaction-based classification:

CategoryIf PresentIf AbsentDetection
Basic (Must-Be)No increase in satisfactionMajor dissatisfactionCustomers assume these exist
Performance (Linear)Proportional satisfactionProportional dissatisfactionCustomers explicitly request
Delighter (Excitement)High satisfactionNo dissatisfactionCustomers don't expect
IndifferentNo impactNo impactNo reaction either way
ReverseDissatisfactionSatisfactionSegment prefers absence

When to Use: Product feature prioritization, understanding customer needs, differentiating from competitors

Kano Questionnaire:

  • Functional: "How would you feel if this feature was present?"
  • Dysfunctional: "How would you feel if this feature was absent?"

Responses: Like it, Expect it, Neutral, Can tolerate, Dislike it

Weighted Scoring Matrix

Multi-criteria quantitative comparison:

Step 1: Define Criteria

CriterionWeightDescription
Customer Value40%Impact on customer satisfaction
Strategic Fit25%Alignment with goals
Effort20%Development cost (inverse)
Risk15%Uncertainty/failure potential (inverse)

Step 2: Score Items

ItemCustomer Value (1-5)Strategic Fit (1-5)Effort (1-5)Risk (1-5)Weighted Score
A54344.15
B35433.75

Step 3: Calculate Weighted Score

Score = Σ (Weight × Score)
Item A = (0.40×5) + (0.25×4) + (0.20×3) + (0.15×4) = 4.20

When to Use: Complex trade-offs, multiple stakeholders, defensible decisions

Value vs Effort Matrix

2×2 prioritization for quick decisions:

quadrantChart
    title Value vs Effort
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets (Plan carefully)
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins (Do first)
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins (Do if time permits)
    quadrant-4 Money Pits (Avoid)
QuadrantValueEffortAction
Quick WinsHighLowDo first
Big BetsHighHighPlan carefully
Fill-insLowLowDo if time permits
Money PitsLowHighAvoid or deprioritize

When to Use: Fast initial triage, backlog grooming, stakeholder alignment

RICE Scoring

Product management prioritization:

FactorDefinitionCalculation
ReachUsers/customers affectedNumber per time period
ImpactEffect on each user0.25 (minimal) to 3 (massive)
ConfidenceCertainty of estimates0.5 (low) to 1 (high)
EffortPerson-months requiredNumber
RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

When to Use: Product roadmap prioritization, feature comparison

WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First)

SAFe/Lean prioritization for flow:

WSJF = Cost of Delay / Job Duration

Cost of Delay = User/Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction
FactorScore (1-20)Description
User/Business Value1-20Benefit to users or business
Time Criticality1-20Urgency, deadlines, decay
Risk Reduction1-20Risk/opportunity addressed
Job Duration1-20Relative size (inverted)

When to Use: Continuous flow environments, maximizing value delivery

Workflow

Phase 1: Prepare

Step 1: Gather Items to Prioritize

## Prioritization Session

**Date:** [ISO date]
**Scope:** [What's being prioritized]
**Stakeholders:** [Who's involved]
**Constraint:** [Timebox, budget, capacity]

### Items

| ID | Description | Owner |
|----|-------------|-------|
| 1 | [Item 1] | [Name] |
| 2 | [Item 2] | [Name] |

Step 2: Select Prioritization Technique

SituationRecommended Technique
Sprint/release planningMoSCoW
Product feature decisionsKano + RICE
Trade-off decisionsWeighted Scoring
Quick triageValue vs Effort
Continuous flowWSJF
Multiple criteriaWeighted Scoring

Phase 2: Execute

Step 1: Apply Selected Technique

Follow the specific technique workflow (see above).

Step 2: Validate Results

  • Do top priorities align with strategy?
  • Are dependencies respected?
  • Does the team have capacity?
  • Are stakeholders aligned?

Step 3: Document Rationale

## Prioritization Rationale

### Top Priorities

1. **[Item A]** - Score: X
   - Rationale: [Why this is top priority]
   - Dependencies: [What it depends on]

2. **[Item B]** - Score: Y
   - Rationale: [Why this is second]
   - Dependencies: [What it depends on]

### Deferred Items

- **[Item C]** - Reason: [Why deferred]

Phase 3: Communicate

Step 1: Create Prioritized Backlog

## Prioritized Backlog

| Rank | Item | Priority/Score | Owner | Target |
|------|------|----------------|-------|--------|
| 1 | [Item A] | Must / 4.5 | [Name] | Sprint 1 |
| 2 | [Item B] | Must / 4.2 | [Name] | Sprint 1 |
| 3 | [Item C] | Should / 3.8 | [Name] | Sprint 2 |

Step 2: Communicate Decisions

  • Share prioritization results with stakeholders
  • Explain rationale for key decisions
  • Address concerns about deprioritized items
  • Set expectations for what's not included

Output Formats

Narrative Summary

## Prioritization Summary

**Session:** [Scope/context]
**Date:** [ISO date]
**Technique:** [MoSCoW/Kano/Weighted Scoring/etc.]
**Facilitator:** prioritization-analyst

### Results Overview

- **Total Items:** N
- **Top Priority:** [Count]
- **Deferred:** [Count]

### Priority Distribution

| Category | Count | % |
|----------|-------|---|
| Must/Quick Wins | X | Y% |
| Should/Big Bets | X | Y% |
| Could/Fill-ins | X | Y% |
| Won't/Money Pits | X | Y% |

### Key Decisions

1. **[Top Item]**: Prioritized because [reason]
2. **[Deferred Item]**: Deferred because [reason]

### Next Steps

1. Begin work on top priority items
2. Re-prioritize at [next review point]

Structured Data (YAML)

prioritization:
  version: "1.0"
  date: "2025-01-15"
  scope: "Q1 Feature Backlog"
  technique: "weighted_scoring"
  facilitator: "prioritization-analyst"

  criteria:
    - name: "Customer Value"
      weight: 0.40
    - name: "Strategic Fit"
      weight: 0.25
    - name: "Effort"
      weight: 0.20
      inverse: true
    - name: "Risk"
      weight: 0.15
      inverse: true

  items:
    - id: "FEAT-001"
      name: "User Dashboard"
      scores:
        customer_value: 5
        strategic_fit: 4
        effort: 3
        risk: 4
      weighted_score: 4.20
      priority: 1
      rationale: "Highest customer value, manageable effort"

    - id: "FEAT-002"
      name: "API Integration"
      scores:
        customer_value: 3
        strategic_fit: 5
        effort: 4
        risk: 3
      weighted_score: 3.75
      priority: 2
      rationale: "Strong strategic alignment"

  moscow_summary:
    must: ["FEAT-001"]
    should: ["FEAT-002", "FEAT-003"]
    could: ["FEAT-004"]
    wont: ["FEAT-005"]

Mermaid Visualizations

Value-Effort Matrix:

quadrantChart
    title Prioritization Matrix
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins
    quadrant-4 Money Pits
    "Feature A": [0.2, 0.9]
    "Feature B": [0.3, 0.7]
    "Feature C": [0.7, 0.8]
    "Feature D": [0.8, 0.3]
    "Feature E": [0.2, 0.2]

MoSCoW Distribution:

pie title MoSCoW Distribution
    "Must" : 3
    "Should" : 4
    "Could" : 5
    "Won't" : 2

When to Use Each Technique

TechniqueBest ForTeam SizeTime Required
MoSCoWSprint/release planningAny30-60 min
KanoProduct featuresProduct team2-4 hours
Weighted ScoringComplex trade-offsCross-functional1-2 hours
Value vs EffortQuick triageAny15-30 min
RICEProduct roadmapProduct team1-2 hours
WSJFContinuous flowSAFe teams30-60 min

Common Pitfalls

PitfallPrevention
Everything is "Must"Enforce category limits (60% capacity)
HiPPO (highest paid person's opinion)Use objective scoring criteria
Ignoring effortAlways consider cost/effort dimension
Static prioritizationRe-prioritize regularly as context changes
OvercomplicatingStart simple, add complexity only if needed
Ignoring dependenciesMap dependencies before finalizing order

Integration

Upstream

  • Requirements - Items to prioritize
  • stakeholder-analysis - Stakeholder input on value
  • swot-pestle-analysis - Strategic context

Downstream

  • Sprint planning - Ordered backlog
  • Roadmaps - Prioritized initiatives
  • decision-analysis - Detailed option evaluation

Related Skills

  • decision-analysis - For complex option evaluation
  • stakeholder-analysis - Stakeholder input on priorities
  • risk-analysis - Risk dimension of prioritization
  • capability-mapping - Capability investment prioritization

User-Facing Interface

When invoked directly by the user, this skill operates as follows.

Arguments

  • <items-or-context>: Items to prioritize (inline list, file reference, or context description)
  • --mode: Prioritization method (default: moscow)

- moscow: Must/Should/Could/Won't categorization (~4K tokens) - kano: Customer satisfaction categorization (~5K tokens) - weighted: Multi-criteria weighted scoring (~6K tokens) - all: All three methods for comparison (~12K tokens)

  • --output: Output format (default: both)

- yaml: Structured YAML for downstream processing - markdown: Formatted markdown tables - both: Both formats

  • --dir: Output directory (default: docs/analysis/)

Execution Workflow

  1. Parse Arguments - Extract items, mode, and output format. If no items provided, ask the user what to prioritize.
  2. Gather Items - Collect from inline list, file reference, or context-based exploration.
  3. Execute Based on Mode:

- MoSCoW: Categorize into Must/Should/Could/Won't with stakeholder input on business criticality, dependencies, compliance, and user impact. - Kano: Classify by satisfaction impact (Basic, Performance, Delighter, Indifferent, Reverse) considering customer expectations and competitive baseline. - Weighted: Define criteria with weights, score each item 1-5, calculate weighted scores, and rank. - All: Run all three methods, compare for consistency, highlight conflicts, and synthesize final priority.

  1. Generate Output - Produce YAML structure, markdown tables (MoSCoW summary, weighted scoring matrix), Mermaid visualizations (quadrantChart, pie chart), and summary report.
  2. Save Results - Save to docs/analysis/prioritization.yaml and/or docs/analysis/prioritization.md (or custom --dir).
  3. Suggest Follow-Ups - Recommend effort estimation for high-priority items, risk analysis for high-risk items, and capability-mapping for alignment.

Version History

  • v1.0.0 (2025-12-26): Initial release

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

Antigravity

30.47%
按下载量换算45

Claude Code

23.97%
按下载量换算35

windsurf

18.61%
按下载量换算28

trae

13.12%
按下载量换算19

OpenCode

7.55%
按下载量换算11

Gemini CLI

3.6%
按下载量换算5

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