skills/magnus919_agent-skills

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/magnus919/agent-skills.git synced 2026-09-11 19:47:12 +03:00

Files

T

2c247a1747 feat(product-lifecycle-learning): add product lifecycle learning skill (#194 ) (#219 )

* feat(product-lifecycle-learning): add product lifecycle learning skill (#194)

Introduce a new skill to close the launch-to-learning loop for product features
and capabilities. Covers:

- Post-launch outcome review with explicit epistemic categories
  (expected/observed/uncertain/inferred)
- Assumption ledger updates with confidence shifts
- Multi-dimensional feature health assessment
- Six lifecycle decisions: continue/improve/harvest/pivot/pause/retire
- Full retirement lifecycle: deprecation communication, migration paths,
  customer treatment during sunset, and internal cleanup
- Durable retained learning records that feed back into roadmap, analytics,
  adoption, experimentation, and specifications

Ships 4 references (discovery brief, epistemic discipline, retirement lifecycle,
feedback destinations), 6 templates (outcome review, assumption ledger update,
feature health record, retirement decision, sunset plan, retained learning
record), and 7 eval cases including adversarial coverage.

Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(product-lifecycle-learning): regenerate marketplace with corrected description

The Claude marketplace JSON contained the original description starting with
"Close" which was replaced with "Compare" to satisfy the imperative-verb
quality check. Regenerate to match the corrected SKILL.md frontmatter.

Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(product-lifecycle-learning): regenerate llms.txt with corrected description

Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: username <username>
Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

2026-08-02 17:33:10 -04:00

2.0 KiB

Raw Permalink Blame History

Outcome Review

Compare expected outcomes against observed outcomes for a feature or capability that has been live long enough to produce data. Use the epistemic discipline categories: every claim is classified as expected, observed, uncertain, or inferred. See ../references/epistemic-discipline.md.

Feature Identity

Field	Value
Feature / capability name
Launch date
Review date
Review window (start → end)
Reviewer

Expected Outcomes

What did we predict or intend before launch? Source each expectation.

#	Expected outcome	Source (spec, roadmap, hypothesis)	Target threshold or range
1
2
3

Observed Outcomes

What actually happened, measured from data? Include confidence intervals and sources.

#	Observed outcome	Value	Confidence interval / precision	Measurement source	Window
1
2
3

Gap Analysis

For each expected outcome, compare against the corresponding observed outcome.

Expected #	Observed #	Gap (direction and magnitude)	Confidence in gap	Notes
			High / Medium / Low

Uncertain Claims

What could not be determined, or is ambiguous or contested?

#	Uncertainty	Type (aleatory / epistemic)	Impact on assessment
1
2

Inferred Conclusions

What do we conclude from the comparison, with reasoning made explicit?

#	Inference	Supporting evidence (expected + observed + uncertain)	Strength (strong / moderate / tentative)
1
2

Summary

Overall alignment: (e.g., "3 of 5 expected outcomes matched; 1 significantly below; 1 uncertain")
Key surprise: (what was most unexpected, in either direction)
Key uncertainty: (the most important thing we cannot determine)
Recommended next step: (proceed to assumption update / health assessment / decision)

2.0 KiB Raw Permalink Blame History