impediment-prioritization

par github

Classe toute liste d'obstacles et leurs contre-mesures en utilisant un modèle de notation de flux de valeur (ROI, coût de mise en œuvre, facilité de déploiement, facteur de risque) et un…

npx skills add https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot --skill impediment-prioritization

Impediment Prioritization Skill

A domain-agnostic skill for ranking impediments and their countermeasures. Works with any {impediment, countermeasure} list — GHQR findings, audit results, retro action items, risk registers, architecture review gaps, etc.

When to Activate

Activate when the user:

  • Asks to prioritize, rank, sequence, or triage impediments, gaps, risks, findings, or remediation items
  • Provides a list of impediments with proposed countermeasures (or asks you to propose countermeasures for a list of problems)
  • Asks "what should we fix first" on any improvement / remediation backlog
  • Mentions value-stream prioritization, A3 countermeasures, ROI-vs-effort, or lean impediment ranking

Inputs

Accepted input: a list of {impediment, countermeasure} pairs. Sources include (non-exhaustive):

SourceMaps to ImpedimentMaps to Countermeasure
GHQR / health-check findingsFinding or gap (Status ≠ Expected)Recommendation / expected value
Audit resultsNon-conformanceRemediation action
Retrospective"What went wrong" itemAgreed improvement
Risk registerRiskMitigation
Architecture reviewGap vs. target stateProposed change
User free-form listProblem statementProposed fix

Rules:

  • One countermeasure per impediment. If the input suggests multiple remediation paths, select the primary one and note alternatives in the rationale — do not emit multiple rows for the same impediment.
  • Collapse duplicates before scoring.
  • If a source link / citation is available, attach it to the countermeasure.
  • If a confidence level is available on the source, surface it as an optional Confidence column.

Scoring Rubric (1–10 scales)

Score each impediment's countermeasure against all four criteria. See references/scoring-rubric.md for anchoring examples at the 1 / 5 / 10 levels across multiple domains (platform engineering, security, SRE, application development, governance).

CriterionScaleDefinition
Return on Investment (ROI)1 = low, 10 = highEfficiency gain delivered by the countermeasure to this step AND to the overall value stream. Not purely financial — weight throughput, cycle-time reduction, defect removal, user / developer experience, and compliance lift.
Cost to Implement1 = inexpensive, 10 = very expensiveHuman capital (salary + time of people needed) plus any purchases, licenses, or infrastructure required to implement the countermeasure.
Ease of Deployment1 = extremely hard, 10 = very easyRemediation effort required to actually deploy the countermeasure end-to-end. Reflects technical complexity, change-management burden, and rollback risk.
Risk Factor1 = low risk, 10 = very high riskRisk weighted on impact to the overall value stream if the countermeasure goes wrong, stalls, or is deferred.

Every score must be accompanied by a one-line rationale. When a score is an estimate rather than drawn from explicit data, mark the rationale with (estimated).

Formula

Priority = ((ROI * (10 / Cost)) + (Ease * (10 / Risk))) / 2
  • Theoretical range: 1 → 100. Practical range on typical backlogs: ~1 → 100.
  • The scale minimum of 1 guarantees Cost and Risk are never zero (no divide-by-zero).
  • Higher Priority = do first.
  • Boundary checks:
    • ROI=10, Cost=1, Ease=10, Risk=1 → ((10*10)+(10*10))/2 = 100
    • ROI=1, Cost=10, Ease=1, Risk=10 → ((1*1)+(1*1))/2 = 1

Use the formula verbatim. Do not reweight, normalize, or substitute.

Method (agent procedure)

  1. Ingest the impediment list. Confirm 1:1 impediment-to-countermeasure mapping; collapse duplicates.
  2. Confirm the countermeasure for each impediment. Prefer documented best practice for the domain. Cite a public / authoritative link when one is available.
  3. Score all four criteria using the rubric. Write a one-line rationale per criterion.
  4. Compute Priority using the formula. Round to one decimal place.
  5. Sort rows by Priority descending. Assign Rank starting at 1.
  6. Render the output table (see below).
  7. Call out the top 3 impediments with a short "why act first" paragraph.
  8. Optional tags: if the workflow requires ownership flags (e.g., [CSA Action Required] vs. [Customer Self-Service] for GHQR/PAK, or [Owner: Team X] / [Self-Service] for internal backlogs), include them on the top-ranked items. Skip if not requested.

Output Template

## Prioritized Impediments

**Scoring:** ROI (1 low → 10 high), Cost (1 cheap → 10 expensive), Ease (1 hard → 10 easy), Risk (1 low → 10 high).
**Formula:** `Priority = ((ROI * (10/Cost)) + (Ease * (10/Risk))) / 2`

| Rank | Impediment | Countermeasure | ROI | Cost | Ease | Risk | Priority | Rationale |
|------|------------|----------------|-----|------|------|------|----------|-----------|
| 1 | [gap] | [action + link] | [n] | [n] | [n] | [n] | [n.n] | ROI: …<br>Cost: …<br>Ease: …<br>Risk: … |

### Top 3 — Act First
1. **[Impediment]** — [why it wins on the formula + optional ownership tag]
2. …
3. …

Worked example (GitHub Enterprise adoption):

RankImpedimentCountermeasureROICostEaseRiskPriorityRationale
12FA not enforced at org levelEnforce org-wide 2FA (docs)928242.5ROI: removes broad credential-compromise class
Cost: admin toggle + member comms
Ease: single org setting, members re-enroll
Risk: low — can stage with grace period
2Secret scanning disabledEnable secret scanning + push protection org-wide (docs)837325.0ROI: catches leaked creds pre-merge
Cost: GHAS seats if not bundled (estimated)
Ease: org-level default
Risk: push-protection may block legitimate commits; stage per repo
3No CODEOWNERS on critical reposAdd CODEOWNERS to top-20 repos (docs)646415.0ROI: targeted review coverage
Cost: team time to define owners (estimated)
Ease: file-level change, but requires owner buy-in
Risk: review bottlenecks if owners undersized

Worked example (generic retrospective action items):

RankImpedimentCountermeasureROICostEaseRiskPriority
1Flaky test suite blocks deploys dailyQuarantine top-10 flaky tests + add retry policy928242.5
2No on-call runbook for payment serviceDraft runbook from last 3 incidents738231.7
3Manual release notes take 2h/releaseGenerate from Conventional Commits via CI645315.8

Assumptions & Guardrails

  • Scores are estimates informed by the rubric and any available source / citation. Mark estimated rationales explicitly with (estimated).
  • Never fabricate context (team size, budget, tool inventory, organizational constraints). If required, ask the user or mark the score as estimated.
  • Final ranking is a recommendation — it should be reviewed with the accountable team / owner before it's committed to an execution plan.
  • Read-only by default — this skill does not execute remediations; it produces a ranked list consumed downstream.

Downstream Integration (optional)

The ranked table produced by this skill is the deliverable. Wire it into whatever downstream artifact your workflow needs (Jira epic, ADR, OKR backlog, incident review, health check report, etc.). This skill does not depend on any sibling skills or external templates.

Plus de skills de github

console-rendering
github
Instructions pour utiliser le système de rendu console basé sur les tags de struct en Go
official
acquire-codebase-knowledge
github
Utilisez cette compétence lorsque l'utilisateur demande explicitement de cartographier, documenter ou s'intégrer dans une base de code existante. Déclenchez-la pour des requêtes comme "cartographier cette base de code", "documenter…
official
acreadiness-assess
github
Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc…
official
acreadiness-generate-instructions
github
Génère des fichiers d'instructions d'agent IA personnalisés via la commande d'instructions AgentRC. Produit .github/copilot-instructions.md (par défaut, recommandé pour Copilot dans VS…
official
acreadiness-policy
github
Aider l'utilisateur à choisir, rédiger ou appliquer une politique AgentRC. Les politiques personnalisent le score de préparation en désactivant les vérifications non pertinentes, en remplaçant l'impact/niveau, en définissant…
official
add-educational-comments
github
Ajouter des commentaires pédagogiques aux fichiers de code pour les transformer en ressources d'apprentissage efficaces. Adapte la profondeur et le ton des explications à trois niveaux de connaissances configurables : débutant, intermédiaire et avancé. Demande automatiquement un fichier si aucun n'est fourni, avec une liste numérotée pour une sélection rapide. Étend les fichiers jusqu'à 125 % en utilisant uniquement des commentaires pédagogiques (limite stricte : 400 nouvelles lignes ; 300 pour les fichiers de plus de 1 000 lignes). Préserve l'encodage du fichier, le style d'indentation, la correction syntaxique et...
official
adobe-illustrator-scripting
github
Rédigez, déboguez et optimisez des scripts d'automatisation Adobe Illustrator en utilisant ExtendScript (JavaScript/JSX). Utilisez lors de la création ou de la modification de scripts qui manipulent…
official
agent-governance
github
Politiques déclaratives, classification d'intention et pistes d'audit pour contrôler l'accès et le comportement des outils d'agents IA. Des politiques de gouvernance composables définissent les outils autorisés/bloqués, les filtres de contenu, les limites de débit et les exigences d'approbation — stockées en tant que configuration, pas de code. La classification d'intention sémantique détecte les invites dangereuses (exfiltration de données, escalade de privilèges, injection d'invite) avant l'exécution des outils à l'aide de signaux basés sur des motifs. Le décorateur de gouvernance au niveau des outils applique les politiques au niveau de la fonction...
official