feature-radar/feature-radar/SKILL.md
Full-cycle feature discovery, evaluation, and prioritization. Builds a persistent knowledge base at .feature-radar/ and runs a 6-phase workflow to recommend what to build next. Modes: full (all phases), quick (scan only), evaluate (prioritize), #N (deep-dive one). MUST use this skill whenever the user asks about feature priorities, roadmaps, what to build, or wants to evaluate/compare feature ideas — even if they don't say "feature radar" explicitly. Use when the user: - Asks "what should we build next?", "what's most impactful?", or similar - Wants to prioritize, rank, or compare features or backlog items - Needs roadmap planning, project direction, or strategic feature decisions - Says "help me prioritize", "review our backlog", "what are we missing" - Mentions .feature-radar/ directory or feature tracking - Wants periodic reassessment of deferred or open opportunities
npx skillsauth add runkids/my-skills feature-radarInstall 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.
| Argument | Mode | Phases |
|----------|------|--------|
| (none) or full | full | 1-6 (all) |
| quick | quick | 1-3 only |
| evaluate | evaluate | reconciliation → 5-6 (skip 1-3) |
| #N (e.g. #2) | focus | Read opportunity N → Phase 5 (single item) → Phase 6 |
Route rules:
.feature-radar/opportunities/{N}-*.md. If not found, list available opportunities and ask user to pick. Then run Phase 5 for that single opportunity, followed by Phase 6.State the detected mode before proceeding: "Mode: {mode}" </HARD-GATE>
If .feature-radar/ does not exist at the project root, create it:
.feature-radar/
├── base.md
├── archive/
├── opportunities/
├── specs/
└── references/
Then generate base.md by completing the following:
go.mod, package.json, Cargo.toml, pyproject.toml. Follow imports to understand the dependency graph. Don't just read the config — understand the architecture.After presenting base.md, support iterative refinement per references/WORKFLOW-PATTERNS.md.
Generate base.md following the structure defined in references/SPEC.md (sections 2-5).
Read references/SPEC.md first, then fill {placeholders} with project-specific analysis.
Key sections to generate:
After creating the directory, ask the user:
"Should I add .feature-radar/ to .gitignore?"
(Recommended if the tracking data is internal and shouldn't be committed.)
On subsequent runs (.feature-radar/ already exists):
base.md — do NOT overwritereferences/DEEP-READ.md steps 2-6Additional directives for this skill:
Execute phases in order.
<HARD-GATE> Phase execution rules (mode-dependent):full mode (default):
quick mode:
evaluate mode:
focus mode (#N):
For each phase completed, state what was produced before moving to the next phase. </HARD-GATE>
Checkpoint: Present classification results using this format, then ask "Continue to Phase 2?"
Phase 1 complete:
| Classification | Count | Items |
|---------------|-------|-------|
| Archive | {n} | {list} |
| Opportunity | {n} | {list} |
| Spec | {n} | {list} |
| Reference | {n} | {list} |
For each archive candidate:
archive/{nn}-{slug}.mdspecs/opportunities/references/specs/ecosystem-trends.mdopportunities/{nn}-{slug}.mdCheckpoint: Present opportunities using this format, then ask "Continue to Phase 4?"
Phase 3 complete: {n} opportunities organized
| # | Opportunity | Impact | Effort | Our Position |
|---|------------|--------|--------|-------------|
| {nn} | {title} | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | {1-line stance} |
Find implemented features that docs don't mention:
| Criterion | Question | |-----------|----------| | Real user demand | Are users actually asking for this? | | Value uplift | Does this meaningfully improve the user experience or unlock new possibilities? | | Innovation potential | Does this introduce a creative breakthrough or unique approach? | | Effort / impact ratio | Is the cost justified by the benefit? | | Architectural fit | Does it align with our core philosophy? | | Ecosystem timing | Is the ecosystem ready? |
Rank into tiers:
Checkpoint: Present tier ranking using this format, then ask "Continue to Phase 6 (Propose)?"
Phase 5 complete:
| Tier | # | Opportunity | Demand | Value | Innovation | Effort/Impact | Fit | Timing |
|------|---|------------|--------|-------|------------|--------------|-----|--------|
| Build next | {nn} | {title} | {H/M/L} | {H/M/L} | {H/M/L} | {H/M/L} | {H/M/L} | {H/M/L} |
| Build soon | ... | | | | | | |
| Monitor | ... | | | | | | |
| Skip | ... | | | | | | |
For each "Build next" feature (top 1-3), present a proposal card:
### {nn}. {Title}
**Pitch**: {One paragraph — what value does this create?}
**Effort**: {N days} — {brief justification}
**Key decisions**:
- {decision 1}
- {decision 2}
After all cards, ask: "Should we enter plan mode for [feature]?"
Follow the template in references/DIRECTIVES.md, with skill name "Complete" and an additional line:
Top recommendation: {feature name} — {one-line pitch}
tools
Manages and syncs AI CLI skills and agents across 50+ tools from a single source. Use this skill whenever the user mentions "skillshare", runs skillshare commands, manages skills or agents (install, update, uninstall, sync, audit, analyze, check, diff, search), or troubleshoots skill/agent configuration (orphaned symlinks, broken targets, sync issues). Covers both global (~/.config/skillshare/) and project (.skillshare/) modes. Also use when: adding new AI tool targets (Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, etc.), setting target include/exclude filters or copy vs symlink mode, using backup/restore or trash recovery, piping skillshare output to scripts (--json), setting up CI/CD audit pipelines, building/sharing skill hubs (hub index, hub add), or working with agents (single .md files synced to agent-capable targets like Claude, Cursor, Augment, OpenCode) via positional `agents` filter or `--kind agent`, plus `.agentignore` and `enable`/`disable` for per-agent toggles.
development
Test-driven development with red-green-refactor loop. Use when user wants to build features or fix bugs using TDD, mentions "red-green-refactor", wants integration tests, or asks for test-first development.
testing
Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan, get grilled on their design, or mentions "grill me".
development
Disciplined diagnosis loop for hard bugs and performance regressions. Reproduce → minimise → hypothesise → instrument → fix → regression-test. Use when user says "diagnose this" / "debug this", reports a bug, says something is broken/throwing/failing, or describes a performance regression.