Skip to main content
ClaudeWave
ES, Spanish
Skill119 estrellas del repoactualizado 10mo ago

roadmap-generator

The roadmap-generator skill transforms architecture designs into structured implementation plans organized by three phases (MVP, Scale, Advanced) with epics, stories, and tasks assigned effort estimates and validation checkpoints. Use it after completing architectural work to create actionable timelines that break large initiatives into manageable work units with realistic duration forecasts and measurable success gates.

Instalar en Claude Code
Copiar
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-cto-team /tmp/roadmap-generator && cp -r /tmp/roadmap-generator/skills/roadmap-generator ~/.claude/skills/roadmap-generator
Después abre una sesión nueva de Claude Code; el skill carga automáticamente.

SKILL.md

# Roadmap Generator

Creates structured implementation roadmaps that transform architecture designs into actionable plans with clear phases, milestones, and validation gates.

## When to Use

- After architecture design is complete
- When translating strategic goals into execution plans
- Creating project timelines with realistic effort estimates
- Breaking down large initiatives into manageable phases

## Roadmap Structure

### Three-Phase Framework

Every roadmap follows MVP → Scale → Advanced phases:

```
Phase 1: MVP (Foundation)
├── Goal: Prove core value proposition
├── Duration: Typically 6-12 weeks
├── Success Criteria: Core functionality working
└── Exit Gate: User validation / metrics threshold

Phase 2: Scale (Growth)
├── Goal: Handle production load, improve reliability
├── Duration: Typically 8-16 weeks
├── Success Criteria: Performance SLAs met
└── Exit Gate: Load testing passed / uptime targets

Phase 3: Advanced (Optimization)
├── Goal: Competitive features, optimization
├── Duration: Ongoing
├── Success Criteria: Feature parity / differentiation
└── Exit Gate: Business metrics achieved
```

## Epic/Story/Task Hierarchy

### Epic
High-level capability that delivers business value.
- **Duration**: 2-6 weeks
- **Format**: "Enable [user] to [capability]"
- **Example**: "Enable customers to receive real-time order notifications"

### Story
User-facing functionality within an epic.
- **Duration**: 2-5 days
- **Format**: "As a [user], I want to [action] so that [benefit]"
- **Example**: "As a customer, I want push notifications so I know when my order ships"

### Task
Technical work to complete a story.
- **Duration**: 2-8 hours
- **Format**: "[Verb] [object] [context]"
- **Example**: "Implement WebSocket connection handler for notification service"

---

## Effort Estimation Framework

### T-Shirt Sizing

| Size | Story Points | Typical Duration | Characteristics |
|------|-------------|------------------|-----------------|
| XS | 1 | 2-4 hours | Trivial change, no unknowns |
| S | 2 | 0.5-1 day | Simple, well-understood |
| M | 3 | 1-2 days | Some complexity, minor unknowns |
| L | 5 | 3-5 days | Complex, some research needed |
| XL | 8 | 1-2 weeks | Very complex, significant unknowns |
| XXL | 13+ | > 2 weeks | Should be broken down |

### Estimation Guidelines

1. **Include buffer**: Add 20-30% for unknowns
2. **Account for context switching**: Multiply by 1.3 for teams juggling priorities
3. **New technology penalty**: Add 50% for unfamiliar tech
4. **Integration tax**: Add 20% for each external system integration

### Team Velocity Calculation

```
Effective Capacity = Team Size × Working Days × Focus Factor × Skill Factor

Focus Factor:
- Dedicated team: 0.8
- 50% allocated: 0.4
- Ad-hoc: 0.2

Skill Factor:
- Expert team: 1.0
- Experienced: 0.8
- Learning curve: 0.5
```

---

## Validation Checkpoints

### Phase Gate Reviews

Each phase ends with a validation gate:

```markdown
## Phase 1 Exit Gate

### Go Criteria
- [ ] Core features functional in staging
- [ ] Unit test coverage > 70%
- [ ] Integration tests passing
- [ ] Performance baseline established
- [ ] Security review completed

### No-Go Signals
- Critical bugs unresolved
- Core functionality missing
- Team capacity insufficient for Phase 2
- Business requirements changed significantly

### Decision
[ ] GO - Proceed to Phase 2
[ ] CONDITIONAL GO - Proceed with identified risks
[ ] NO-GO - Address blockers first
```

### Mid-Phase Checkpoints

- **Week 2**: Architecture validation
- **Week 4**: Integration milestone
- **Week 6**: Feature complete checkpoint
- **Weekly**: Sprint review and course correction

---

## Dependency Management

### Dependency Types

| Type | Description | Mitigation |
|------|-------------|------------|
| **Technical** | Service A needs Service B | Start B early, use mocks |
| **Team** | Need DevOps for deployment | Reserve capacity early |
| **External** | Third-party API integration | Validate early, have fallback |
| **Data** | Need production data for testing | Create synthetic data |

### Critical Path Identification

1. List all dependencies
2. Identify longest chain
3. Mark critical path items
4. Add buffer to critical path (25%)
5. Parallelize non-critical work

---

## Output Format

### Roadmap Document Structure

```markdown
# Implementation Roadmap: [Project Name]

**Created**: [Date]
**Owner**: [Team/Person]
**Architecture Reference**: [Link to architecture doc]

## Executive Summary
[2-3 sentences on approach and timeline]

## Timeline Overview
[Visual timeline or Gantt representation]

## Phase 1: MVP (Weeks 1-8)

### Phase Goals
- [Goal 1]
- [Goal 2]

### Epics

#### Epic 1.1: [Name]
**Duration**: [X weeks]
**Dependencies**: [List]

| Story | Points | Owner | Dependencies |
|-------|--------|-------|--------------|
| [Story 1] | M | [Team] | None |
| [Story 2] | L | [Team] | Story 1 |

**Tasks for Story 1**:
- [ ] [Task 1] (S)
- [ ] [Task 2] (M)

### Phase 1 Exit Criteria
- [ ] [Criterion 1]
- [ ] [Criterion 2]

### Phase 1 Risks
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-------------|--------|------------|
| [Risk] | High/Med/Low | High/Med/Low | [Action] |

---

## Phase 2: Scale (Weeks 9-16)
[Same structure as Phase 1]

---

## Phase 3: Advanced (Weeks 17+)
[Same structure as Phase 1]

---

## Resource Requirements

### Team Composition
| Role | Phase 1 | Phase 2 | Phase 3 |
|------|---------|---------|---------|
| Backend | 2 FTE | 3 FTE | 2 FTE |
| Frontend | 1 FTE | 2 FTE | 1 FTE |
| DevOps | 0.5 FTE | 1 FTE | 0.5 FTE |

### Infrastructure Costs
| Phase | Monthly Cost | Notes |
|-------|-------------|-------|
| Phase 1 | $X | Development environment |
| Phase 2 | $Y | Staging + production |
| Phase 3 | $Z | Full scale |

---

## Success Metrics

| Metric | Phase 1 Target | Phase 2 Target | Phase 3 Target |
|--------|---------------|----------------|----------------|
| [Metric 1] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value] |
| [Metric 2] | [Value] | [Value] | [Value
antipattern-detectorSkill

Detect common technical and organizational anti-patterns in proposals, architectures, and plans. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to identify red flags before they become problems.

architecture-pattern-selectorSkill

Recommend architecture patterns (monolith, microservices, serverless, modular monolith) based on scale, team size, and constraints. Use when cto-architect needs to select the right architectural approach for a new system or migration.

assumption-challengerSkill

Identify and challenge implicit assumptions in plans, proposals, and technical decisions. Use when strategic-cto-mentor needs to surface hidden assumptions and wishful thinking before they become costly mistakes.

clarification-protocolSkill

Generate targeted clarifying questions (2-3 max) that challenge vague requirements and extract missing context. Use after request-analyzer identifies clarification needs, before routing to specialist agents. Helps cto-orchestrator avoid delegating unclear requirements.

cost-estimatorSkill

Infrastructure and development cost estimation for technical projects. Use when planning budgets, evaluating build vs buy decisions, or projecting TCO for architecture choices.

ctoSlash Command

Get CTO-level strategic and technical guidance

cto-architectSubagent

Use this agent when you need comprehensive technical architecture guidance, strategic technology decisions, or system design for complex web/mobile applications with ML/AI integration. Specifically invoke this agent when

cto-orchestratorSubagent

Use this agent when you need strategic technical leadership, complex task orchestration across multiple domains, or help translating business requirements into technical execution. This agent excels at breaking down ambiguous requests, routing work to specialized agents, and maintaining strategic context throughout complex projects.