plugins/imbue/skills/scope-guard/SKILL.md
Scores feature worthiness and enforces branch-size limits against overengineering. Use when evaluating whether a feature belongs in the current scope or branch.
npx skillsauth add athola/claude-night-market scope-guardInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
The cheapest feature is the one you never build. Scope-guard weighs each proposed feature against its value, its cost, and the branch budget, so only what is earned ships.
scope-guard:worthiness-scored)scope-guard:backlog-compared)scope-guard:budget-checked)scope-guard:decision-documented)Prevents overengineering by both Claude and human during the brainstorm, plan, and execute workflow. Forces explicit evaluation of every proposed feature against business value, opportunity cost, and branch constraints.
Core Belief: Not all features deserve implementation. Most ideas should be deferred to backlog until proven necessary.
Three Pillars:
Use the Worthiness formula:
(Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction) / (Complexity + Token Cost + Scope Drift)
Verification: Run the command with --help flag to verify availability.
See decision-framework.md for details.
Thresholds:
Compare against docs/backlog/queue.md:
Default: 3 major features per branch
If at capacity, must drop existing feature, split to new branch, or justify override.
Watch for Yellow/Red zones:
See branch-management.md for monitoring.
scope-guard:worthiness-scored)Score each factor (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13):
Details: decision-framework.md
scope-guard:backlog-compared)docs/backlog/queue.md for existing itemsscope-guard:budget-checked)Count current features in branch. If at budget (default: 3), new feature requires:
scope-guard:decision-documented)Record outcome:
scope-guard:github-issue-created completedocs/backlog/queue.md with issue linkIMPORTANT: Deferral is NOT complete until a GitHub issue exists. This prevents context loss when branches are merged or abandoned.
Key Principles:
See anti-overengineering.md for full rules and red flags.
**Verification:** Run the command with `--help` flag to verify availability.
docs/backlog/
├── queue.md # Active ranked queue
└── archive/
├── ideas.md # Deferred feature ideas
├── optimizations.md # Deferred performance work
├── refactors.md # Deferred cleanup
└── abstractions.md # Deferred patterns
Verification: Run the command with --help flag to verify availability.
When deferring, add to docs/backlog/queue.md:
| Rank | Item | Worthiness | Added | Branch/Epic | Category |
|------|------|------------|-------|-------------|----------|
| 1 | [New item description] | 1.8 | 2025-12-08 | current-branch | idea |
Verification: Run the command with --help flag to verify availability.
Re-rank by Worthiness Score after adding.
At end of brainstorming, before documenting design:
Self-invoke prompt: "Before documenting this design, let me evaluate the proposed features with scope-guard."
Before finalizing implementation plan:
Self-invoke prompt: "Before finalizing this plan, let me verify scope with scope-guard."
Periodically during execution:
Self-invoke prompt: "This branch has grown significantly. Let me check scope-guard thresholds."
When evaluating a feature, create these todos:
scope-guard:worthiness-scoredscope-guard:backlog-comparedscope-guard:budget-checkedscope-guard:github-issue-created (MANDATORY if deferring - blocks step 5)scope-guard:decision-documentedNote: Step 4 (github-issue-created) is REQUIRED when deferring items. You cannot mark decision-documented complete without first completing github-issue-created for deferrals.
superpowers:brainstorming - Ideation workflow this guardssuperpowers:writing-plans - Planning workflow this validatesimbue:review-core - Review methodology patternimbue:karpathy-principles - Compact four-principle synthesis covering scope, simplicity, surgical edits, and verifiable goalsdocs/quality-gates.md#skill-level-quality-gate-composition for the full gate-skill federation graphresearch
Generate diverse solution candidates with category-spanning ideation methods and rotation. Use when stuck on a design or fighting repetitive LLM output.
tools
--- name: validate-pr description: Use when you need a diff-derived test plan for a PR: reads the diff, groups changes by area, runs targeted verifications, and proves revert-tests are genuine guards, not dead assertions. alwaysApply: false category: validation tags: - pr - validation - test-plan - diff - revert-test - evidence tools: [] usage_patterns: - diff-derived-test-plan - revert-test-quality-check - evidence-capture complexity: intermediate model_hint: standard estimated_tokens: 650
development
Contract for the project decision journal (tradeoffs and lessons-learned logs). Use when recording a decision, tradeoff, or lesson, or building a consumer hook.
development
Ramps implementation ambition a notch only after the prior increment is understood. Use when building a feature you must understand, not just ship.