AgentStack
Browse Sign in
Browse Why AgentStack Sell Docs
Sign in
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Shipkit Spec Roadmap

skill-stefan-stepzero-shipkit-shipkit-spec-roadmap · by stefan-stepzero

Prioritize which specs to write first from product + engineering definitions. Triggers: 'spec roadmap', 'what to spec first', 'prioritize features', 'spec backlog'.

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

Install

$ agentstack add skill-stefan-stepzero-shipkit-shipkit-spec-roadmap

✓ 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.

View the full security report →

Verified badge

Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.

AgentStack Verified badge Links to your public security report.
[![AgentStack Verified](https://agentstack.voostack.com/badges/verified.svg)](https://agentstack.voostack.com/security/report/skill-stefan-stepzero-shipkit-shipkit-spec-roadmap)

Reliability & compatibility

Security review passed
0 installs to date
no reviews yet
2mo ago

Declared compatibility

Claude CodeClaude Desktop

Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.

Preview Execution monitoring

We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.

How agent discovery & health will work →
Are you the author of Shipkit Spec Roadmap? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

shipkit-spec-roadmap — Spec Prioritization Roadmap

Purpose: Bridge the gap between definitions and specs by building an explicit prioritization roadmap. Scores features by goal-gate phasing, dependency depth, foundation value, and mechanism complexity to determine spec order.

Output format: JSON — structured roadmap at .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json


When to Invoke

User triggers:

  • "What should I spec first?"
  • "Prioritize the features"
  • "Create a spec roadmap"
  • "Spec backlog"
  • "What order should I write specs?"

Before:

  • /shipkit-spec (this determines WHICH spec to write next)

After:

  • /shipkit-product-definition (need features to prioritize)
  • /shipkit-engineering-definition (need mechanisms for effort estimation)
  • /shipkit-product-goals (recommended — gates drive phasing)

Workflow position:

  • After definitions are complete, before writing individual specs
  • Can be re-run after new features are added or priorities change

Prerequisites

Required:

  • .shipkit/product-definition.json — features to prioritize
  • .shipkit/engineering-definition.json — mechanisms for effort estimation

Recommended:

  • .shipkit/goals/*.json — gate definitions for phase mapping (especially goals/strategic.json or goals/product.json)

Optional:

  • .shipkit/specs/ — detect already-specced features to mark as completed

If goals missing: Fall back to single-phase roadmap sorted by dependency + foundation value only.


Arguments

If $ARGUMENTS contains --update: Load existing spec-roadmap.json, refresh spec statuses, re-score, and present changes.

If $ARGUMENTS contains --regenerate: Discard existing roadmap and rebuild from scratch.

If $ARGUMENTS is empty: Check for existing file and offer choices.


Process

Step 0: Check Existing Roadmap

> Fork context — no user prompts. You are dispatched in a fork and have no user channel. Skip the file-exists menu entirely.

  1. Read .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json (if exists)
  2. If $ARGUMENTS contains --update: proceed to Step 1 with existing data as baseline
  3. If $ARGUMENTS contains --regenerate or no file exists: proceed to Step 1 fresh
  4. If file exists and no argument: read .shipkit/reviews/planning-assessment.json if present. If the latest review lists a gap against this artifact, archive the existing file to .shipkit/.archive/spec-roadmap.YYYY-MM-DD.json and regenerate addressing the gap. Otherwise, read the existing file and exit early with a "no changes needed" report — the reviewer already accepted it.

Step 1: Load Context

Read all context files in parallel (single message, multiple tool calls):

1. Read: .shipkit/product-definition.json    # Features, patterns, differentiators
2. Read: .shipkit/engineering-definition.json # Mechanisms, components, design choices
3. Read: .shipkit/goals/*.json               # Gates and criteria (glob for all goal files)
4. Read: .shipkit/why.json                   # Vision and purpose context
5. Read: .shipkit/codebase-index.json        # Existing code patterns and structure
6. Glob + Read: .shipkit/specs/**/*.json     # Existing specs (todo, active, shipped)

Extract from context:

  • Features: ID, name, description, dependencies, mechanisms, mvp flag
  • Mechanisms: ID, name, complexity indicators (design choices count, component count)
  • Gates: ID, name, criteria list, which features map to which gate
  • Existing specs: Which features already have specs (and their status)

Step 2: Build Feature-Mechanism-Gate Graph

For each feature in product-definition.json:

  1. Map to gate: Which gate does this feature's criteria belong to? (from goals)
  • If no goals exist, assign all features to a single "Default" phase
  1. Map to mechanisms: Which mechanisms does this feature use? (from engineering-definition)
  2. Map dependencies: What features must be specced/built before this one?
  3. Map pain coverage: Which user pain points does this feature address? (from product-discovery if available)
  4. Detect already-specced: Does a spec already exist in .shipkit/specs/?

Step 3: Score and Rank

For each unspecced feature, compute three scores:

Foundation Value (0-10): How many other features depend on this one?

  • Count direct dependents + transitive dependents
  • Higher score = more features unlocked by speccing this first

Pain Coverage (0-10): How many user pain points does this feature address?

  • Count pain points from product-discovery.json that this feature addresses
  • Weight by pain severity if available

Dependency Depth (0-N): How deep in the dependency chain is this feature?

  • 0 = no dependencies (can be specced immediately)
  • Higher = more prerequisites needed first

Effort Estimate (T-shirt size):

  • Count mechanisms used by this feature
  • Count design choices within those mechanisms
  • Apply sizing:

| Size | Mechanisms | Design Choices | Typical Duration | |------|-----------|----------------|-----------------| | XS | 0 | 0 | Fork context — do not prompt for confirmation. Write the roadmap directly. The planning reviewer will flag any misalignment on the next review cycle.


Step 5: Write Roadmap

Use Write tool to create: .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json

JSON Schema: See references/output-schema.md for complete schema definition.

Example: See references/example.json for realistic roadmap.


Effort Estimation Guide

Effort is derived from mechanism complexity, NOT from implementation guesswork:

| Signal | What It Means | |--------|--------------| | Feature uses 0 mechanisms | Pure UI/content, XS effort | | Feature uses 1 mechanism with no design choices | Straightforward implementation, S | | Feature uses mechanisms with design choices | Each design choice = a decision point during implementation | | Feature has 3+ mechanisms | Cross-cutting concerns, likely L or XL | | Feature depends on unbuilt features | Effective effort includes prerequisite work |

Don't guess duration in days — use T-shirt sizes. The effortDays field is a rough midpoint for summary math only.


Completion Checklist

  • [ ] Loaded product-definition.json and engineering-definition.json
  • [ ] Loaded goals (if available) for gate-based phasing
  • [ ] Detected already-specced features
  • [ ] Built dependency graph with no cycles
  • [ ] Scored all unspecced features (foundation, pain, depth)
  • [ ] Assigned effort sizes from mechanism complexity
  • [ ] Presented roadmap grouped by phase for user validation
  • [ ] Wrote .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json

After Completion

Guardrails Check: Before moving to next task, verify:

  1. Persistence - Has the roadmap been saved to .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json?
  2. Next step - Suggest: "Run /shipkit-spec to start speccing the top-priority feature."
  3. Session length - Long session? Consider /shipkit-work-memory for continuity.

Natural capabilities (no skill needed): Implementation, debugging, testing, refactoring, code documentation.

Suggest skill when: User needs to make decisions, create persistence, or check project status.

Success Criteria

Roadmap is complete when:

  • [ ] JSON file conforms to Shipkit artifact convention ($schema, type, version, lastUpdated, source, summary)
  • [ ] Every feature from product-definition.json is accounted for (either in phases or completed)
  • [ ] Phases map to goal gates (or single "Default" phase if no goals)
  • [ ] Priority order is defensible (dependency-first, then foundation value, then pain coverage)
  • [ ] Effort sizes derived from mechanism complexity (not guessed)
  • [ ] Dependency graph has no cycles and warnings are surfaced
  • [ ] Already-specced features listed in completed array
  • [ ] Summary counts match actual data
  • [ ] File saved to .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json

Context Files This Skill Reads

Required (read if exist — error if missing):

  • .shipkit/product-definition.json — Features to prioritize
  • .shipkit/engineering-definition.json — Mechanisms for effort estimation

Recommended (read if exist):

  • .shipkit/goals/*.json — Gate definitions for phase mapping
  • .shipkit/why.json — Vision and purpose context
  • .shipkit/codebase-index.json — Existing code patterns and structure

Optional (read if relevant):

  • .shipkit/specs/**/*.json — Detect already-specced features
  • .shipkit/product-discovery.json — Pain points for coverage scoring

Context Files This Skill Writes

Write Strategy: CREATE or UPDATE

Creates/Updates:

  • .shipkit/spec-roadmap.json — Prioritized spec roadmap

Update Behavior:

  • Full file replacement on each write
  • Previous version is overwritten
  • Use --update flag to refresh an existing roadmap

When This Skill Integrates with Others

Before This Skill

  • /shipkit-product-definition — Defines features to prioritize (required)
  • /shipkit-engineering-definition — Defines mechanisms for effort estimation (required)
  • /shipkit-product-goals — Defines gates for phase mapping (recommended)

After This Skill

  • /shipkit-spec — Uses roadmap to determine which feature to spec next
  • /shipkit-plan — After specs are written, plans implementation

Remember: This skill bridges definitions and specs. It doesn't write specs — it tells you which specs to write first and why. The roadmap is a living document; re-run with --update as features get specced or priorities change.

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.