Stats
Actions
Tags
From ork
Scores and ranks product backlogs using RICE, WSJF, ICE, MoSCoW frameworks. Use for prioritizing features, roadmap decisions, and evaluating trade-offs.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/ork:prioritizationThis skill is limited to the following tools:
The summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Score, rank, and justify backlog decisions using the right framework for the situation.
Score, rank, and justify backlog decisions using the right framework for the situation.
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 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 |
## 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 for ICE, Kano, and full scale tables.
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.
## 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 for MoSCoW buckets and practical tips. See references/wsjf-guide.md for the full scoring guide.
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.
Bucket features before estimation. Must-Haves alone should ship a viable product.
## 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)
When two items compete for the same team capacity, quantify what delaying each item costs per month.
## 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 for the Value-Effort Matrix and full trade-off template. See references/rice-scoring-guide.md for detailed RICE calibration.
| 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 |
product-frameworks — Full PM toolkit (value prop, market sizing, competitive analysis, user research, business case)write-prd — Convert prioritized features into product requirements documentsproduct-analytics — Define and instrument the metrics that feed RICE reach/impact scoresokr-design — Set the objectives that determine which KPIs drive RICE impact scoringmarket-sizing — TAM/SAM/SOM analysis that informs strategic prioritycompetitive-analysis — Competitor context that raises or lowers WSJF time criticality scoresVersion: 1.0.0
npx claudepluginhub yonatangross/orchestkit --plugin orkApplies RICE, MoSCoW, Kano, ICE, and Opportunity Scoring frameworks to rank features and backlog items by priority.
Apply RICE, ICE, MoSCoW, Kano, and Value vs Effort frameworks for prioritizing features, roadmaps, backlogs, and trade-offs.
References 9 prioritization frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano, MoSCoW, Opportunity Score) with formulas, usage guides, and templates. Use for selecting, comparing, or learning prioritization methods.