prioritization
$
npx mdskill add yonatangross/orchestkit/prioritizationApplies RICE, WSJF, ICE, MoSCoW, and opportunity cost scoring to rank backlog items and justify roadmap decisions.
- Helps prioritize features, compare initiatives, and evaluate trade-offs between competing work items.
- Integrates with tools like Read, Glob, Grep, WebFetch, and WebSearch for data access.
- Uses a decision tree to select the appropriate framework based on deadlines, data availability, and context.
- Presents results through structured scoring tables and clear recommendations for backlog ranking.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/prioritizationView on GitHub ↗
---
name: prioritization
description: "Prioritization frameworks — RICE, WSJF, ICE, MoSCoW, and opportunity cost scoring for backlog ranking. Use when prioritizing features, comparing initiatives, justifying roadmap decisions, or evaluating trade-offs between competing work items."
tags: [rice, wsjf, ice, moscow, prioritization, backlog, scoring, ranking]
context: fork
agent: product-strategist
version: 1.0.0
author: OrchestKit
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: false
complexity: medium
persuasion-type: guidance
metadata:
category: document-asset-creation
allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep, WebFetch, WebSearch]
---
# Prioritization Frameworks
Score, rank, and justify backlog decisions using the right framework for the situation.
## Decision Tree: Which Framework to Use
```
Do you have a hard deadline or regulatory pressure?
YES → WSJF (Cost of Delay drives sequencing)
NO → Do you have reach/usage data?
YES → RICE (data-driven, accounts for user reach)
NO → Are you in a time-boxed planning session?
YES → ICE (fast, 1-10 scales, no data required)
NO → Is this a scope negotiation with stakeholders?
YES → MoSCoW (bucket features, control scope creep)
NO → Value-Effort Matrix (quick 2x2 triage)
```
| Framework | Best For | Data Required | Time to Score |
|-----------|----------|---------------|---------------|
| RICE | Data-rich teams, steady-state prioritization | Analytics, user counts | 30-60 min |
| WSJF | SAFe orgs, time-sensitive or regulated work | Relative estimates only | 15-30 min |
| ICE | Startup speed, early validation, quick triage | None | 5-10 min |
| MoSCoW | Scope negotiation, release planning | Stakeholder input | 1-2 hours |
| Value-Effort | 2x2 visual, quick team alignment | None | 10-15 min |
---
## RICE
```
RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort
```
| Factor | Scale | Notes |
|--------|-------|-------|
| Reach | Actual users/quarter | Use analytics; do not estimate |
| Impact | 0.25 / 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 3 | Minimal → Massive per user |
| Confidence | 0.3 / 0.5 / 0.8 / 1.0 | Moonshot → Strong data |
| Effort | Person-months | Include design, eng, QA |
```markdown
## RICE Scoring: [Feature Name]
| Feature | Reach | Impact | Confidence | Effort | Score |
|-------------|--------|--------|------------|--------|--------|
| Smart search| 50,000 | 2 | 0.8 | 3 | 26,667 |
| CSV export | 10,000 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 10,000 |
| Dark mode | 30,000 | 0.25 | 1.0 | 1 | 7,500 |
```
See [rules/prioritize-rice.md](rules/prioritize-rice.md) for ICE, Kano, and full scale tables.
---
## WSJF
```
WSJF = Cost of Delay / Job Size
Cost of Delay = User Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction (1-21 Fibonacci each)
```
Higher WSJF = do first. Fibonacci scale (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) forces relative sizing.
```markdown
## WSJF: GDPR Compliance Update
User Value: 8 (required for EU customers)
Time Criticality: 21 (regulatory deadline this quarter)
Risk Reduction: 13 (avoids significant fines)
Job Size: 8 (medium complexity)
Cost of Delay = 8 + 21 + 13 = 42
WSJF = 42 / 8 = 5.25
```
See [rules/prioritize-wsjf.md](rules/prioritize-wsjf.md) for MoSCoW buckets and practical tips.
See [references/wsjf-guide.md](references/wsjf-guide.md) for the full scoring guide.
---
## ICE
```
ICE Score = Impact × Confidence × Ease (all factors 1-10)
```
No user data required. Score relative to other backlog items. Useful for early-stage products and rapid triage sessions.
---
## MoSCoW
Bucket features before estimation. Must-Haves alone should ship a viable product.
```markdown
## Release 1.0 MoSCoW
### Must Have (~60% of effort)
- [ ] User authentication
- [ ] Core CRUD operations
### Should Have (~20%)
- [ ] Search, export, notifications
### Could Have (~20%)
- [ ] Dark mode, keyboard shortcuts
### Won't Have (documented out-of-scope)
- Mobile app (Release 2.0)
- AI features (Release 2.0)
```
---
## Opportunity Cost & Trade-Off Analysis
When two items compete for the same team capacity, quantify what delaying each item costs per month.
```markdown
## Trade-Off: AI Search vs Platform Migration (Q2 eng team)
### Option A: AI Search
- Cost of Delay: $25K/month (competitive risk)
- RICE Score: 18,000
- Effort: 6 weeks
### Option B: Platform Migration
- Cost of Delay: $5K/month (tech debt interest)
- RICE Score: 4,000
- Effort: 8 weeks
### Recommendation
Human decides. Key factors:
1. Q2 OKR: Increase trial-to-paid conversion (favors AI Search)
2. Engineering capacity: Only one team, sequential not parallel
3. Customer commitment: No contractual deadline for either
```
See [rules/prioritize-opportunity-cost.md](rules/prioritize-opportunity-cost.md) for the Value-Effort Matrix and full trade-off template.
See [references/rice-scoring-guide.md](references/rice-scoring-guide.md) for detailed RICE calibration.
---
## Common Pitfalls
| Pitfall | Mitigation |
|---------|------------|
| Gaming scores to justify pre-decided work | Calibrate as a team; document assumptions |
| Mixing frameworks in one table | Pick one framework per planning session |
| Only tracking high-RICE items; ignoring cost of delay | Combine RICE with explicit delay cost analysis |
| MoSCoW Must-Have bloat (>70% of scope) | Must-Haves alone must ship a viable product |
| Comparing RICE scores across different goals | Only compare within the same objective |
---
## Related Skills
- `product-frameworks` — Full PM toolkit (value prop, market sizing, competitive analysis, user research, business case)
- `write-prd` — Convert prioritized features into product requirements documents
- `product-analytics` — Define and instrument the metrics that feed RICE reach/impact scores
- `okr-design` — Set the objectives that determine which KPIs drive RICE impact scoring
- `market-sizing` — TAM/SAM/SOM analysis that informs strategic priority
- `competitive-analysis` — Competitor context that raises or lowers WSJF time criticality scores
---
**Version:** 1.0.0
More from yonatangross/orchestkit
- agent-orchestrationAgent orchestration patterns for agentic loops, multi-agent coordination, alternative frameworks, and multi-scenario workflows. Use when building autonomous agent loops, coordinating multiple agents, evaluating CrewAI/AutoGen/Swarm, or orchestrating complex multi-step scenarios.
- ai-ui-generationAI-assisted UI generation patterns for json-render, v0, Bolt, and Cursor workflows. Covers prompt engineering for component generation, review checklists for AI-generated code, design token injection, refactoring for design system conformance, and CI gates for quality assurance. Use when generating UI components with AI tools, rendering multi-surface MCP visual output, reviewing AI-generated code, or integrating AI output into design systems.
- analyticsQuery cross-project usage analytics. Use when reviewing agent, skill, hook, or team performance across OrchestKit projects. Also replay sessions, estimate costs, and view model delegation trends.
- animation-motion-designAnimation and motion design patterns using Motion library (formerly Framer Motion) and View Transitions API. Use when implementing component animations, page transitions, micro-interactions, gesture-driven UIs, or ensuring motion accessibility with prefers-reduced-motion.
- architecture-patternsArchitecture validation and patterns for clean architecture, backend structure enforcement, project structure validation, test standards, and context-aware sizing. Use when designing system boundaries, enforcing layered architecture, validating project structure, defining test standards, or choosing the right architecture tier for project scope.
- ascii-visualizerASCII diagram patterns for architecture, workflows, file trees, and data visualizations. Use when creating terminal-rendered diagrams, box-drawing layouts, progress bars, swimlanes, or blast radius visualizations.
- assessAssesses and rates quality 0-10 with pros/cons analysis. Use when evaluating code, designs, or approaches.
- async-jobsAsync job processing patterns for background tasks, Celery workflows, task scheduling, retry strategies, and distributed task execution. Use when implementing background job processing, task queues, or scheduled task systems.
- audit-fullFull-codebase audit using 1M context window. Security, architecture, and dependency analysis in a single pass. Use when you need whole-project analysis.
- audit-skillsAudits all OrchestKit skills for quality, completeness, and compliance with authoring standards. Use when checking skill health, before releases, or after bulk skill edits to surface SKILL.md files that are too long, have missing frontmatter, lack rules/references, or are unregistered in manifests.