scope

scope

What this is, what it deliberately is not, and whether to build it at all.

The line this skill holds: not over-scoping, which is the entire job. A competent scoper over-scopes because they lack context, not despite expertise, which is why what already exists is checked before scoping rather than after. Scoping can end in "do not build this", and that outcome must never flow onward by itself.

How this skill works

node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" survey
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" board <projects.json>
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" check <proposed.json>
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" create <project.json>
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" fill <project.json> <existing.json>
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" prove <project.json> <readback.json> <created-url>
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/projects.js" prove-update <output.json> <readback.json>

Do not compose queries or payloads by hand: every name resolves through the config map, and shipped names on a renamed workspace read as a workspace with nothing in it. Never invent a select value; fetch the live options before choosing any. If config is absent the script refuses and names setup.

Iterate in chat, write once on approval. A project is expensive to undo, so refinement happens in conversation and one write happens at the end.

---

Step 1. Context first: what already exists

Run survey and send its three queries: every project, every Process artifact, every problem statement. Every hit that overlaps the new scope becomes an Out Of Scope line reading "already exists". This is the single largest source of trimming, and it is why context comes before drafting.

The problem statement is required. Find it in the survey's third result; if none fits, stop and point at problem-statement, because the stakes live there and nowhere else. A Draft was never published and a Canceled one was retracted; say the status when offering them.

---

Step 2. Draft the scope document

Expect either no project row or one at Intake; scope owns the row and new owns the tasks. The body, in order: What We Are Building, Out Of Scope, Success Criteria, Risks And Dependencies. All four required.

• What We Are Building is one paragraph ending with a required sentence naming the smallest version that would prove this works. Anything that assumes the approach works without proving it moves to Out Of Scope with the reason "later, once this is proven".
• Out Of Scope: "nothing" is not an acceptable answer, and the script refuses the literal spellings of it. A blank here is the single best predictor that the project will grow.
• Success Criteria: checkable by someone else, which is why it is not called Objectives.
• Risks And Dependencies: "none known" is a real answer and gets written, so it is clear the question was asked.

The format does the trimming, never judgment and never a review round. When a section runs long, cut it. Do not raise a section's cap.

Description and Business outcome are one-sentence summaries derived from the body, never the reverse. The problem is not a section: it lives in the related Problem Statement memo, and restating it makes two copies that disagree within a month.

---

Step 3. Effort, then priority, against the board

Set Level of Effort first. Before writing Priority, run board on the survey's projects result and show what is already at each priority: a priority set without seeing the others is not relative to anything, and a board where everything is Prio 1 carries no information. The script refuses a priority with no effort behind it.

---

Step 4. Check, preview, write on a yes, prove

check the draft, fix the refusals, ask about the concerns. Preview the whole body and every property inline. Create only on an explicit yes.

Then create for a new row, or fill when a hand-made row sits at Intake, which is the only state fill accepts. Create the page or send the update, read the page back, and prove it with prove or prove-update. Never report success with a section missing.

The problem statement relation is not written. The output names both pages; ask the user to link the memo through Memos in Notion, and say that until then the project sits in the Needs attention view, which is that view working.

The row leaves at Scoped, or at Canceled when the honest answer is "do not build this", and Canceled is a result worth writing down, not a failure.

---

Step 5. Offer new, pre-filled, and stop

Offer to run new with the scoped project pre-filled. Never auto-run it. Scoping can end in "do not build this", and that outcome must not flow onward by itself.

---

What this skill does not do

• Does not create tasks. That is new.
• Does not set Owner, Stakeholders or Timeline. Those are new's, when the work starts, and the script refuses them here.
• Does not set Priority before Level of Effort, and the script refuses it.
• Does not raise a section's cap when the content runs long. Cut.
• Does not finish without a problem statement. A project that cannot name its problem statement has not been scoped.