AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Schedule Backlog

skill-conn-castle-agent-layer-schedule-backlog · by conn-castle

>-

No reviews yet
0 installs
19 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-conn-castle-agent-layer-schedule-backlog

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

Are you the author of Schedule Backlog? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

schedule-backlog

This is a backlog-scheduling workflow, not an implementation workflow. Default behavior is proposal-first:

  • evaluate a coherent backlog slice
  • map it into roadmap phases
  • summarize the proposal before mutating ROADMAP.md, BACKLOG.md, or ISSUES.md

Defaults

  • Default mode is proposal-only.
  • Default proposal size is small to medium and reviewable.
  • Prefer existing incomplete phases when they fit the work cleanly.
  • Do not renumber completed phases.

Inputs

Accept any combination of:

  • a focus area, phase number, or text query
  • a proposal size
  • a maximum number of new phases
  • whether issue-impact notes should be included
  • whether approved changes should later be applied

Multi-agent pattern

Recommended roles:

  1. Standards reader: extracts roadmap and decision constraints.
  2. Backlog triage lead: selects candidate backlog items.
  3. Issue cross-checker: identifies issue prerequisites or obsoletions.
  4. Roadmap integrator: drafts the phase proposal.
  5. Reporter: writes the proposal and approval guidance.

Global constraints

  • Do not implement backlog items in this workflow.
  • Do not invent requirements that are not in BACKLOG.md, ROADMAP.md, ISSUES.md, DECISIONS.md, or README.md.
  • Keep the proposal reviewable and coherent.
  • Treat non-end-user-visible engineering work as issue-ledger material unless the roadmap explicitly needs a separate engineering phase.

Human checkpoints

  • Required: ask when a proposed placement would require renumbering a completed phase or making a non-obvious sequencing tradeoff.
  • Optional: ask after the proposal only when the requested apply step would commit to a non-obvious prioritization or sequencing choice.
  • Stay autonomous while reading, triaging, and drafting the proposal itself.

Roadmap workflow

Phase 0: Preflight (Standards reader)

  1. Read, in order, when they exist:
  • ROADMAP.md
  • DECISIONS.md
  • BACKLOG.md
  • ISSUES.md
  • README.md

Phase 1: Select the backlog slice (Backlog triage lead)

  1. Respect any user focus first.
  2. Otherwise choose a reviewable subset using:
  • roadmap alignment
  • priority
  • cohesion
  • dependency clarity
  1. Separate any misclassified engineering-only items that belong in ISSUES.md, not the roadmap.

Phase 2: Cross-check issue and decision impacts (Issue cross-checker)

For each candidate group, identify:

  • prerequisite issues
  • issues that would likely become obsolete
  • decisions or roadmap constraints that affect scheduling

Phase 3: Draft the proposal (Roadmap integrator)

For each suggestion, provide:

  • target phase or new phase proposal
  • included backlog items
  • why the grouping fits
  • prerequisites
  • issue impacts

If a new phase is needed, include:

  • preferred placement
  • goal
  • high-level tasks
  • exit criteria

Phase 4: Draft the proposal summary (Reporter)

The proposal summary must contain:

  1. # Roadmap Update Summary
  • current roadmap shape
  • backlog slice reviewed
  • short recommendation summary
  1. ## Suggestions
  • labeled A, B, C, ...
  1. ## Backlog Hygiene Notes
  • duplicates or misclassified items
  1. ## Open Questions
  • only when a sequencing decision truly needs the user
  1. ## Approval Options
  • how the user can approve, reject, or modify each suggestion

Guardrails

  • Do not schedule a huge backlog sweep in one proposal.
  • Do not bury prerequisites or sequencing risk.
  • Do not mutate roadmap files in the same step as drafting the proposal unless the request already includes applying a clear, low-ambiguity proposal.
  • Do not present engineering refactors as end-user-visible roadmap work unless the roadmap truly needs them there.

Definition of done

  • The proposal summary includes every required section (Summary, Suggestions, Backlog Hygiene Notes, Open Questions, Approval Options).
  • ROADMAP.md, BACKLOG.md, and ISSUES.md were not mutated in this run unless the user's request explicitly included an apply step with a clear, low-ambiguity proposal.
  • Each proposal entry names its target phase (existing or new), included backlog items, grouping rationale, prerequisites, and issue impacts.
  • Misclassified engineering-only items are flagged in Backlog Hygiene Notes rather than silently included in a roadmap phase.

Final handoff

After drafting the proposal:

  1. Summarize the best proposal options.
  2. Tell the user how to approve, reject, or modify each suggestion.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.