mirror of
https://github.com/magnus919/agent-skills.git
synced 2026-09-11 19:47:12 +03:00
Add capability and portfolio mapping, state transitions, operating models, decision rights, stakeholder information, templates, evals, and neighboring-owner routing.\n\nAI-assisted: Jasper orchestrated implementation and verification with OpenCode. Signed-off-by: Magnus Hedemark <magnus919@pm.me>
79 lines
6.5 KiB
Markdown
79 lines
6.5 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: technology-radar
|
|
description: Build and maintain technology radars for adoption, trial, assessment, and hold decisions, and choose proportionate architecture-governance paths for technology portfolios. Use when governing technology choices, build-versus-buy decisions, architecture standards, exceptions, or engineering portfolio risk. Do not use for enterprise capability or target-state architecture, writing ADRs, implementing systems, security engineering, or operational incident/runbook work.
|
|
license: MIT
|
|
compatibility: No runtime dependency.
|
|
metadata:
|
|
source_repo: https://github.com/magnus919/hermes-profiles
|
|
source_commit: 867a555
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Technology Radar
|
|
|
|
CTO methodology for making technology decisions, governing architecture, measuring engineering effectiveness, managing technical debt, and operating an innovation pipeline. These frameworks help a CTO balance short-term delivery velocity with long-term platform health.
|
|
|
|
## When Not to Use
|
|
|
|
- Route enterprise capability maps, operating-model design, and current/target-state roadmaps to [`enterprise-architecture`](../enterprise-architecture/SKILL.md). This skill stays focused on technology portfolio posture and governance mechanics; use [`software-architecture`](../software-architecture/SKILL.md) for system-level target design.
|
|
- Route the durable record of one consequential decision to `adr-authoring`; use this skill to choose the governance path and connect the decision to standards or radar feedback.
|
|
- Route system design and code changes to the relevant engineering skill, security requirements and threat modeling to `secure-software-engineering`, and live operations or SLO work to `site-reliability-engineering`.
|
|
|
|
## Domain Model
|
|
|
|
| Domain | Covers | Artifact |
|
|
|--------|--------|----------|
|
|
| **Technology Radar** | Adopt/Trial/Assess/Hold quadrants, tool selection criteria, deprecation policy | Technology radar document |
|
|
| **Build vs Buy** | TCO analysis, decision matrices, vendor evaluation, integration cost | Build-vs-buy recommendation |
|
|
| **Architecture Governance** | Automated policy, federated decisions, advice processes, centralized review, standards, exceptions, and feedback | Governance decision record, standard, exception, radar update |
|
|
| **Engineering Metrics** | DORA (deploy frequency, lead time, MTTR, change failure rate), SPACE, DevEx | Engineering dashboard, health report |
|
|
| **Technical Debt** | Interest calculation, remediation prioritization, principal estimation | Technical debt register |
|
|
| **Innovation Pipeline** | Horizon scanning, POC criteria, production readiness gates | Innovation funnel, POC report |
|
|
|
|
## When to Load
|
|
|
|
Load this skill when the task involves:
|
|
|
|
- Evaluating a new technology or tool for adoption
|
|
- Making a build-vs-buy decision with TCO analysis
|
|
- Designing or auditing architecture governance processes
|
|
- Setting up engineering metrics dashboards (DORA, SPACE)
|
|
- Quantifying and prioritizing technical debt remediation
|
|
- Running an innovation pipeline with POC-to-production gates
|
|
- Deprecating or retiring legacy technology
|
|
- Selecting or auditing automated policy, federated decisions, advice processes, or centralized review
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Governance Workflow
|
|
|
|
For architecture or technology-governance work, read `references/architecture-governance.md` and:
|
|
|
|
1. Establish the decision, intended outcome, affected systems and teams, evidence available, and the decision owner.
|
|
2. Assess reversibility, scope, risk, blast radius, regulatory exposure, and cross-team impact. Record uncertainty instead of converting it into a false score.
|
|
3. Select the lightest governance mode that still controls the credible downside: automated policy, federated decision, advice process, or centralized review. Escalate when evidence shows that the decision is less reversible, broader, riskier, or more regulated than first assumed.
|
|
4. Define the decision record, implementation checks, exception path, and signals that will cause reconsideration.
|
|
5. Feed implementation and operational evidence back into the decision, standards, exceptions, and radar posture. Treat feedback as a reason to learn, not as retroactive blame.
|
|
|
|
## Reference Files
|
|
|
|
| Reference | Load When | File |
|
|
|-----------|-----------|------|
|
|
| Technology Radar | You need to evaluate and categorize a technology or tool for adoption, trial, assessment, or hold | `references/technology-radar.md` |
|
|
| Build vs Buy | You're comparing build vs buy options with TCO analysis and decision criteria | `references/build-vs-buy.md` |
|
|
| Architecture Governance | You're choosing or auditing proportional governance modes, standards, exceptions, escalation, or feedback | `references/architecture-governance.md` |
|
|
| Engineering Metrics | You need to measure engineering effectiveness with DORA, SPACE, or DevEx frameworks | `references/engineering-metrics.md` |
|
|
|
|
## Design Principles
|
|
|
|
1. **Technology is a means, not an end.** Every technology decision must trace back to a business outcome. "Because it's new" is not a reason to adopt. "Because it solves X faster/safer/cheaper" is.
|
|
2. **Radar is a living document.** A technology radar should be refreshed when evidence, strategy, risk, or usage changes materially. Set a cadence that fits the portfolio, and make significant adoption, hold, promotion, or retirement decisions trigger an update rather than waiting for a calendar event.
|
|
3. **Build vs buy is never just cost.** Total Cost of Ownership includes maintenance, hiring, training, integration, migration, and opportunity cost. A cheaper build today may be vastly more expensive over 3 years.
|
|
4. **Engineering metrics measure the system, not the people.** DORA metrics measure the delivery capability of the org. SPACE measures developer satisfaction. Neither is a performance review tool for individuals.
|
|
5. **Technical debt has a principal and an interest payment.** The principal is the cost to fix it properly. The interest is the recurring drag on velocity. Prioritize debt where interest/principal ratio is highest.
|
|
6. **Production readiness gates exist to prevent crisis.** Every gate that is skipped in the name of speed will be paid for in incident response time later.
|
|
7. **Governance should follow consequence.** Local and reversible decisions should stay local; irreversible, regulated, high-blast-radius, or materially cross-team decisions need stronger coordination or authority.
|
|
|
|
## Portability
|
|
|
|
This skill is intentionally host-neutral. Use your agent's normal mechanisms to load the references, templates, and scripts listed here. Do not assume a particular profile system, task orchestrator, memory service, or response-handoff format.
|