本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

codexkit-safe-pi-planning

Facilitate SAFe 6.0 PI Planning events. Structure the 2-day cadence, generate PI Objectives with Business Value scores, build the Program Board for dependency visualization, and run the Confidence Vote. Use before every Program Increment when the organization follows SAFe.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md4.8 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml192 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

SAFe PI Planning Facilitator

When to Use

  • Before a new Program Increment (PI) starts
  • When an Agile Release Train (ART) needs to align on the next 8–12 weeks
  • When cross-team dependencies must be mapped and risks must be surfaced
  • When PI Objectives need to be written with quantified Business Value

Procedure

Step 1 — Preparation (Pre-Event)

  1. Collect team capacity for each iteration (available story points or throughput)
  2. Pull the prioritized feature backlog from Product Management
  3. Identify known architectural and cross-team dependencies
  4. Prepare the blank Program Board (teams × iterations matrix)

Step 2 — Day 1: Draft Plan

  1. Business Context — Product Management presents vision and top features
  2. Architecture Vision — System Architect presents enablers and tech runway
  3. Team Breakout #1 — Each team drafts iteration plans, identifies dependencies
  4. Draft Plan Review — Teams present plans; stakeholders flag risks
  5. Management Q&A — Address impediments, resource conflicts, scope concerns

Step 3 — Day 2: Finalize

  1. Team Breakout #2 — Adjust plans based on feedback, resolve dependency conflicts
  2. Program Board Finalization — All dependencies mapped as strings on the board
  3. PI Objectives — Each team writes 5–8 objectives using SMART format
  4. Business Value — Product Management assigns BV score (1–10) to each objective
  5. Confidence Vote — Fist of five (1–5); reshuffle if average < 3

Step 4 — Output

  1. Compile PI Objectives table (Objective / BV / Committed vs Uncommitted)
  2. Generate Program Board visualization (dependency map)
  3. Document risks identified during planning
  4. Record Confidence Vote result

Inputs

InputRequiredFormat
Feature backlogYesPriority-ordered list with descriptions
Team capacity per iterationYesStory points or throughput number
Known dependenciesRecommendedFrom/To team + feature reference
ART rosterYesList of teams in the ART

Output

## PI Objectives — [Team Name]

| # | Objective | Business Value | Type |
|---|-----------|---------------|------|
| 1 | [SMART objective] | 8 | Committed |
| 2 | [SMART objective] | 6 | Committed |
| 3 | [Stretch objective] | 4 | Uncommitted |

## Program Board

| Team / Iteration | I1 | I2 | I3 | I4 | I5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Team Alpha | Feature A | Feature B ──dep──→ | | Feature D | |
| Team Beta | | ←──dep── Feature C | Feature E | | |

## Risks (ROAM)

| Risk | Category | Owner | Status |
|------|----------|-------|--------|
| API contract not finalized | Resolved | Arch | ROAM-R |

## Confidence Vote: 3.8 / 5.0 — PROCEED

Definition of Done

  • All teams have 5–8 PI Objectives with Business Value scores
  • Program Board shows all cross-team dependencies
  • ROAM risk board is populated
  • Confidence Vote ≥ 3.0
  • PI Objectives distinguish Committed vs Uncommitted

Examples

Prompt

We are starting PI 25.2 for our ART with 4 teams.
Here is our feature backlog: [paste features]
Team capacities: Alpha=120sp, Beta=100sp, Gamma=85sp, Delta=110sp
Known dependency: Team Alpha's Payment API is needed by Team Beta in I2.
Generate the PI Planning output including objectives, program board, and risks.

Quality Criteria

  • Steps are executable in sequence without external context
  • Decision points have clear if/then branching
  • Rollback or abort procedures are documented for risky steps
  • Expected duration or time-per-step is estimated

Verification (4C)

CheckQuestion
CorrectnessDo the steps execute correctly in the order specified?
CompletenessAre decision points, error handling, and escalation paths all documented?
Context-fitCould someone with the right access but no prior context complete this runbook?
ConsequenceIf Step N fails and the operator skips to Step N+1, what breaks?

Edge Cases

  • Steps require access the operator doesn't have — Document exact access requirements upfront. Include escalation contact for emergency access.
  • Environment differs from documented state — Add a pre-flight check as Step 0 to verify prerequisites before starting.
  • Runbook is triggered during off-hours — Document who to contact and which steps can be safely deferred to business hours.

Changelog

  • v1.0.0 — Initial release

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design rigorous A/B test plans with hypothesis, sample size calculation, Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE), randomization strategy, and decision rules. Includes guardrail metrics and rollout playbook. Use when planning product experiments, conversion optimization, or data-driven feature decisions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Review REST and GraphQL API designs for consistency, usability, and best practices. Covers naming conventions, versioning strategy, error format, pagination, authentication patterns, and breaking change detection. Use when reviewing API specs, designing new APIs, or auditing existing endpoints.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Write Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following the Michael Nygard format. Captures context, options considered, decision rationale, and consequences. Use when making technology choices, framework selections, or any architectural decision that future developers need to understand.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Assess organizational readiness for financial audits (internal or external). Map assertions to account balances, check evidence completeness, score readiness using a Red/Amber/Green framework, and generate a remediation timeline. Aligned with SOX, IFRS, and GAAP audit standards. Use before scheduled audits or when preparing for first-time compliance.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Design safe recurring Codex automations with clear prompts, outputs, schedules, and gating rules.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

Refine Product Backlog Items to meet INVEST criteria. Write User Stories with Acceptance Criteria in Given/When/Then format, estimate with Story Points, and flag dependencies. Use before sprint planning when backlog items need grooming. Do not use to prioritize the backlog — that is the Product Owner's decision.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

hoavdc/CodexKit252026年10月11日 更新

hoavdc のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する