Skill: stanestane/game-design-feature-prioritization (version 1.0.0)

--- name: game-design-feature-prioritization description: Prioritize game design feature options by comparing expected impact, implementation cost, strategic fit, and roadmap context. Use when choosing between competing feature ideas, deciding what to do now versus later, ranking solution paths after ideation, or identifying which option is best immediately and which is better long-term. --- # Game Design Feature Prioritization Choose the strongest next move, not just the loudest idea. Use this skill to compare candidate features or solution paths and decide what should happen now, later, or not at all. Keep the process practical. Rough structured judgment is better than fake precision, but explicit comparison is still useful. Read `references/family-conventions.md` when you need the shared conventions for this GROW-derived skill family. ## What to produce Generate: 1. **Candidate list** - what is being prioritized 2. **Evaluation matrix** - impact, cost, fit, risk, timing 3. **Priority ranking** - now, later, discard, or monitor 4. **Recommendation** - what should happen next and why ## Process ### 1. List the candidates Make sure the compared items are clear and meaningfully distinct. ### 2. Score the options Use rough structured scoring such as 1-5 for: - **Impact** - expected player or business value - **Implementation cost** - time, resources, complexity - **Strategic fit** - alignment with game direction and roadmap - **Risk** - uncertainty, dependency burden, fragility - **Timing** - whether this is right now or later ### 3. Interpret in context Do not choose purely by raw score. Also consider: - roadmap sequencing - enabling value for future features - opportunity cost - whether a slightly weaker option is smarter in the long run ### 4. Recommend action For each option, classify it as: - **Do now** - **Test first** - **Do later** - **Discard for now** ## Response structure ### Candidates - ... ### Evaluation Matrix | Option | Impact | Cost | Strategic Fit | Risk | Timing | Notes | |---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---|---| ### Priority Ranking - ... ### Recommendation - ... ## Fast mode - What are we choosing between? - Which option has the best impact-to-cost profile? - Which option best fits the roadmap right now? - What should we do now, later, or not at all? ## Working principle The locally optimal choice is not always the strategically best one.

path: references/family-conventions.md
content: # GROW-Derived Family Conventions

Use this family of skills as workflow tools for game design thinking and decision-making.

## Shared stance
- Prefer practical design movement over abstract theory.
- Keep outputs decision-oriented.
- Avoid pretending rough judgments are precise truths.
- When possible, distinguish player value, business value, implementation cost, risk, and strategic fit.
- Prefer several credible paths before commitment.
- Treat these skills as complements, not strict silos.

## How this skill family fits together
- **game-design-goal-framing**: clarify what the feature is for
- **game-design-option-generation**: expand the solution space
- **game-design-five-options**: force explicit comparison across several candidate paths
- **game-design-roadblock-reframing**: get unstuck when one blocker dominates thinking
- **game-design-ideal-outcome-backcasting**: work backward from the best believable future
- **game-design-transformative-reuse**: adapt or recombine what already exists
- **game-design-feature-prioritization**: choose what to do now, later, or not at all

## Recommendation
Start with the narrowest skill that matches the user's real need. If several apply, use them in sequence rather than collapsing everything into one bloated answer.

Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)