AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Roadmap Planning

skill-michaelsvanbeek-personal-agent-skills-roadmap-planning · by michaelsvanbeek

>-

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

Install

$ agentstack add skill-michaelsvanbeek-personal-agent-skills-roadmap-planning

✓ 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 Roadmap Planning? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Roadmap Planning

When to Use

  • Building an annual or quarterly roadmap for your team
  • Prioritizing competing initiatives when capacity is constrained
  • Mapping cross-team dependencies for a planning cycle
  • Preparing a roadmap presentation for leadership, stakeholders, or the team
  • Re-evaluating priorities mid-cycle due to shifting business needs
  • Translating company strategy into team-level initiatives

Roadmap Anatomy

A roadmap is not a feature list. It communicates what the team intends to accomplish, why, and in what sequence — at a level of abstraction appropriate for the audience.

Required Elements

| Element | Description | |---------|-------------| | Theme | High-level area of investment (e.g., "Platform reliability", "Self-serve onboarding") | | Initiative | A scoped body of work within a theme, deliverable within a quarter | | Outcome | The measurable result the initiative produces (tied to OKR or business metric) | | Owner | The person or squad accountable for delivery | | Dependencies | Teams, services, or decisions this initiative depends on | | Confidence | High / Medium / Low — how certain is this commitment? | | Time horizon | Now (this sprint), Next (this quarter), Later (future quarter) |

What a Roadmap is NOT

  • A Gantt chart with exact dates for every task
  • A backlog sorted by priority
  • A promise to stakeholders — it's a plan that evolves
  • A list of features without outcomes

Planning Process

Step 1: Gather Inputs

Before planning, collect:

  1. Company/org OKRs — What is the company betting on this quarter/year?
  2. Customer feedback — Top pain points, feature requests, churn reasons
  3. Tech debt inventory — What slows the team down? What's fragile?
  4. Stakeholder requests — What do product, sales, support, and leadership need?
  5. Team retro themes — Recurring process or tooling frustrations
  6. Carry-over — Unfinished work from last cycle

Step 2: Generate Candidates

List all potential initiatives. For each, capture:

### Initiative: 

- **Theme**: 
- **Problem**: 
- **Outcome**: 
- **Effort**: S / M / L / XL
- **Impact**: High / Medium / Low
- **Confidence**: High / Medium / Low
- **Dependencies**: 
- **Requestor**: 

Step 3: Prioritize

Use a structured framework. Do not priority-sort by gut feeling alone.

RICE Framework (adapted)

| Factor | Definition | Scale | |--------|-----------|-------| | Reach | How many users/teams/customers are affected? | Number or % | | Impact | How much does it improve the outcome? | 3 = massive, 2 = high, 1 = medium, 0.5 = low | | Confidence | How sure are we about reach and impact? | 100% / 80% / 50% | | Effort | Person-weeks to deliver | Number |

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

Alternative: Value vs. Effort Matrix

For simpler prioritization, plot initiatives on a 2×2:

        High Value
            │
    DO FIRST│  PLAN CAREFULLY
   (quick   │  (high effort,
    wins)   │   high value)
────────────┼──────────────── Effort →
    FILL    │  AVOID / DEFER
   (low     │  (high effort,
    value,  │   low value)
    easy)   │
        Low Value

Step 4: Allocate Capacity

Split team capacity deliberately:

| Category | Target % | Examples | |----------|----------|---------| | Roadmap features | 60–70% | New capabilities, customer-facing work | | Tech debt / platform | 15–20% | Reliability, performance, developer experience | | Support / unplanned | 10–15% | Bugs, incidents, ad hoc requests | | Growth / learning | 5% | Spikes, prototypes, skill development |

Document the allocation in your quarterly plan so the team and stakeholders share expectations.

Step 5: Sequence and Commit

Arrange initiatives into time horizons:

  • Now (this sprint/month): Actively in progress, fully committed
  • Next (this quarter): High confidence, planned but not yet started
  • Later (future quarter): Lower confidence, directional

Only items in Now and Next should be broken into epics in your issue tracker. Later stays in the roadmap doc to signal direction.


Roadmap Artifacts

Quarterly Roadmap Brief

Create in your team's shared documentation tool (Confluence, Notion, Google Docs, etc.):

# Q[N] YYYY Roadmap — [Team Name]

## Strategy Alignment
How this quarter's work connects to company OKRs.

## Themes
1. Theme A — why this matters
2. Theme B — why this matters

## Committed Initiatives
| Initiative | Theme | Owner | Outcome | Effort | Dependencies |
|-----------|-------|-------|---------|--------|-------------|
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

## Stretch / Aspirational
Initiatives we'd take on if capacity allows.

## What We're NOT Doing (and Why)
Explicitly list deprioritized requests and the reasoning.

## Risks and Dependencies
| Risk | Mitigation | Owner |
|------|-----------|-------|

## Capacity Allocation
Pie chart or table showing planned split.

Roadmap Presentation (Leadership)

When presenting to leadership:

  1. Lead with outcomes, not features — "Reduce onboarding time from 3 days to 3 hours" not "Build self-serve provisioning"
  2. Show trade-offs — What you chose NOT to do and why
  3. Quantify confidence — Don't present everything as a guarantee
  4. Highlight dependencies and risks — Especially cross-team blockers
  5. Keep it to one page — Executives skim; make it scannable

Anti-Patterns

| Anti-Pattern | Why It's Bad | Better Approach | |-------------|-------------|----------------| | Overcommitting | Everything is "committed" with no slack | Leave 15–20% unplanned capacity | | Feature factory | Roadmap is a list of features with no outcomes | Every item must have a measurable outcome | | Planning in isolation | No input from team members on effort or feasibility | Include ICs in estimation and trade-off discussions | | All or nothing | Only big bets, no quick wins | Mix initiative sizes for momentum and morale | | Ignoring tech debt | Debt compounds silently until it explodes | Allocate 15–20% deliberately per cycle | | Roadmap as contract | Treating roadmap as immutable promise | Review and adjust monthly; communicate changes |


Review Cadence

| Frequency | Activity | |-----------|----------| | Weekly | Check initiative progress against plan in standup or status update | | Monthly | Review roadmap health — are we on track? Any re-prioritization needed? | | Quarterly | Full roadmap refresh — score last quarter, plan next quarter | | Annually | Strategic planning — set themes and direction for the year |

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.