xiaohongshu
xiaohongshu
adr-roadmap
Generate phased implementation roadmaps from Architecture Decision Records
Full skill instructions
Analyze Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) and generate phased implementation roadmaps with timelines, dependencies, resource allocation, and risk assessment for any project type.
Key Capabilities:
project-mngt skill insteaddoc-flow skill insteadcharts-flow skill instead| Input | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| adr_directory | Absolute path to ADR markdown files | {project_root}/docs/ADR/ |
| project_context | Project type, team size, timeline constraints | "Trading platform, 5 FTE, 6-month timeline" |
| Input | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|
| output_file | Roadmap destination path | {adr_directory}/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md |
| max_phase_duration | Maximum weeks per phase | 8 weeks |
| prioritize_adr | Force specific ADR ID first (e.g., "ADR-02") | None |
| phase_model | Phasing approach: poc-mvp-prod, iterative, waterfall | poc-mvp-prod |
| team_size | Number of FTE engineers | 3 |
| target_phases | Desired number of phases | Auto-calculate |
Actions:
ADR-*.md files from specified directoryADR-00_index.md) if presentValidation:
Output: ADR inventory with metadata
Actions:
Dependency Classification:
Output:
Actions:
Effort Estimation Formula:
Total Effort = Σ(ADR Complexity × Base Effort) × Risk Buffer
Base Effort (1=1d, 2=2d, 3=4d, 4=10d, 5=20d)
Risk Buffer = 1.2 (20% contingency)
Output:
Phasing Algorithm:
Apply selected phase model:
Phase 1: POC (Proof of Concept)
- Minimal ADRs to validate technical feasibility
- Target: 2-3 weeks
- Criteria: Core integration working end-to-end
Phase 2: MVP (Minimum Viable Product)
- Add multi-user, persistence, basic security
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Production-ready for limited users
Phase 3: Production
- Cloud deployment, full security, monitoring
- Target: 6-8 weeks
- Criteria: Enterprise-grade reliability
Phase 4: Scale & Optimize
- Performance tuning, advanced patterns
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Performance targets met
Phase 5: Advanced Features
- Extended capabilities, continuous improvement
- Target: Ongoing
- Criteria: Feature backlog prioritized
Each iteration (2-4 weeks):
- Select ADR cluster (low dependency)
- Implement and validate
- Integrate with existing system
- Deploy incrementally
Phase by ADR category:
- Infrastructure ADRs
- Core business logic ADRs
- Integration ADRs
- Optimization ADRs
Phase Assignment Rules:
Output:
Actions:
Phase Duration = (Σ ADR Effort in Phase) / (Team Size × Efficiency Factor)
Efficiency Factor = 0.7 (account for meetings, context switching)
gantt
title ADR Implementation Timeline
dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD
section Phase 1
POC: p1, 2025-01-15, 3w
section Phase 2
MVP: p2, after p1, 6w
Output:
Generate comprehensive roadmap at {output_file}:
Document Structure:
# ADR Implementation Roadmap
## Document Control
| Item | Details |
|------|---------|
| **Project Name** | [Enter project name] |
| **Document Version** | [e.g., 1.0] |
| **Date** | [Current date] |
| **Document Owner** | [Name and title] |
| **Prepared By** | [Technical Lead/Architect name] |
| **Status** | [Draft / In Review / Approved] |
### Document Revision History
| Version | Date | Author | Changes Made | Approver |
|---------|------|--------|--------------|----------|
| 1.0 | [Date] | [Name] | Initial roadmap | |
| | | | | |
## Executive Summary
- Project overview
- Total ADRs: N
- Total phases: M
- Timeline: X weeks
- Team size: Y FTE
- Key milestones
## Phase 1: [Phase Name]
### Objectives
### Duration
### ADRs to Implement
#### ADR-XXX: Title
- Complexity: N/5
- Effort: X hours
- Scope: What to implement
- Deferred: What to skip
- Acceptance Criteria
### System Architecture
- Mermaid diagram
### Implementation Order
- Week-by-week breakdown
### Deliverables
### Success Criteria
### Risk Assessment
### Exit Criteria
## Phase 2: [Phase Name]
[Same structure]
...
## ADR Dependency Matrix
- Mermaid flowchart
- Critical path highlighted
- Parallel opportunities
## Technical Debt Management
- POC shortcuts (acceptable)
- MVP shortcuts (acceptable)
- Production standards (zero tolerance)
- Debt remediation timeline
## Risk Assessment
- Phase 1 risks
- Phase 2 risks
- Go/no-go thresholds
## Testing Strategy
- Phase 1: Manual testing only
- Phase 2: Automated unit/integration
- Phase 3: Security, performance, compliance
- Phase 4: Load testing, chaos engineering
## Acceptance Criteria
- Phase 1 acceptance
- Phase 2 acceptance
- [Per phase]
## Traceability
- ADR to Phase mapping table
- Phase to Timeline mapping
- Upstream sources (BRD, PRD)
- Downstream artifacts (SYS, REQ, SPEC)
Document Formatting:
Output: Complete roadmap markdown file
Characteristics:
Phasing Strategy:
Example Phase Structure:
Phase 1: Foundation (Tech stack, cloud, database)
Phase 2: Core Features (Business logic ADRs)
Phase 3: Integration (External services, APIs)
Phase 4: Polish (Performance, UX, advanced features)
Characteristics:
Phasing Strategy:
Example Phase Structure:
Phase 1: Infrastructure Prep (Observability, feature flags)
Phase 2: Low-Risk Migration (Read-only endpoints)
Phase 3: Medium-Risk Migration (Write endpoints with rollback)
Phase 4: High-Risk Migration (Core business logic)
Phase 5: Decommission Legacy (Remove old system)
Migration-Specific Sections to Add:
Characteristics:
Phasing Strategy:
Example Phase Structure:
Phase 1: Test Infrastructure (Add missing tests)
Phase 2: Module A Refactor (Database layer)
Phase 3: Module B Refactor (API layer)
Phase 4: Module C Refactor (Business logic)
Phase 5: Cleanup (Remove deprecated code)
When to create a new phase?
Decision tree:
1. Check dependencies:
- New ADRs have no dependencies on current phase? → New phase
- All dependencies in current/prior phases? → Same phase
2. Check complexity threshold:
- Current phase exceeds max_phase_duration (8 weeks)? → New phase
- Under threshold? → Same phase
3. Check risk isolation:
- ADR is high-risk (complexity 4-5)? → Consider separate phase for POC
- Low-medium risk? → Group with similar ADRs
4. Check milestone boundary:
- Natural project milestone (POC, MVP, Beta, GA)? → Phase boundary
- Mid-milestone? → Same phase
Output: Phase boundary decision
Order ADRs by:
Priority ranking (highest to lowest):
Algorithm:
def sequence_adrs(adrs_in_phase):
# Step 1: Topological sort by dependencies (must respect)
sorted_by_deps = topological_sort(adrs_in_phase)
# Step 2: Within each dependency level, sort by risk/value
for level in sorted_by_deps:
if phase == "POC":
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.risk, reverse=True) # High-risk first
else:
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.value, reverse=True) # High-value first
return flatten(sorted_by_deps)
Output: Ordered ADR sequence per phase
Aggregate ADR complexity when explicit ratings not available:
Estimation heuristics:
Complexity 1 (Trivial):
- Simple configuration change
- Library upgrade (no breaking changes)
- Documentation update
- Effort: 1 day
Complexity 2 (Simple):
- Add logging/monitoring
- Simple API endpoint
- Basic CRUD operation
- Effort: 2 days
Complexity 3 (Moderate):
- New authentication provider
- Database schema change
- Third-party integration
- Effort: 3-5 days
Complexity 4 (Complex):
- New deployment architecture
- Real-time data processing
- Multi-service integration
- Effort: 1-2 weeks
Complexity 5 (Architectural):
- Cloud provider migration
- Event-driven architecture
- Major technology swap
- Effort: 3-4 weeks
Output: Complexity rating per ADR
Acceptable shortcuts per phase:
| Phase | Acceptable Shortcuts | Must Have | Remediation Phase |
|---|---|---|---|
| POC | Hardcoded credentials, in-memory data, print logging, no tests, local deployment | Working integration | MVP |
| MVP | Basic error handling, simple caching, minimal monitoring | Multi-user auth, persistence, unit tests | Production |
| Production | Partial optimization | Full security, monitoring, HA, compliance | Scale |
| Scale | Some manual processes | Performance targets, auto-scaling | Advanced |
| Advanced | None (continuous improvement) | All features production-grade | N/A |
Output: Technical debt tracking table
User Invocation:
Use the adr-roadmap skill to create implementation roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {project_root}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Interactive Brokers MCP server, 3 developers, POC in 3 weeks
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 3
Generate roadmap in {project_root}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions:
{project_root}/docs/ADR/Generated Output: ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md (~1,400 lines)
User Invocation:
Use adr-roadmap skill for microservices migration roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/
- Project context: Monolith to microservices migration, 8 developers, 9-month timeline
- Phase model: iterative
- Team size: 8
Generate roadmap in {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions:
Generated Output: Migration roadmap with rollback plans
User Invocation:
Create 6-month data platform roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Real-time analytics platform, 10 engineers, 6-month timeline
- Phase model: waterfall
- Team size: 10
- Target phases: 6
Generate roadmap in {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions:
Generated Output: Resource-aware roadmap with 6 phases
User Invocation:
Create roadmap for IoT device firmware.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: /firmware/docs/adr/
- Project context: IoT sensor firmware, 2 embedded engineers, hardware prototype ready
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 2
- Constraints: Hardware prototype available Week 4
Generate roadmap in /firmware/docs/adr/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions:
Generated Output: Hardware-aware roadmap with gated phases
Roadmap document must satisfy:
Missing ADR metadata:
Circular dependencies:
Zero ADRs found:
Conflicting constraints:
File: {project}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Size: 1,000-2,000 lines (varies by ADR count)
Token Limit: <100,000 tokens
Sections (in order):
Document Header:
# ADR Implementation Roadmap
Document Control:
Table of Contents: Links to all sections
Executive Summary:
Phase Definitions (1 section per phase):
ADR Dependency Matrix:
Technical Debt Management:
Risk Assessment:
Testing Strategy:
Acceptance Criteria:
Traceability:
project-mngt Skill Instead When:doc-flow Skill Instead When:adr-roadmap + charts-flow When:adr-roadmap + project-mngt When:| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.0 | 2025-01-08 | Initial skill creation with comprehensive methodology |
End of Skill Definition
xiaohongshu
technical spec
product ux expert
database patterns
Conduct multi-agent task orchestration and workflow coordination.
Initialize project with Conductor artifacts (product definition,
Expert in web animations, transitions, and motion design using Framer Motion and CSS
Creates Mermaid and ASCII diagrams for flowcharts, architecture, ERDs, state machines, mindmaps, and more. Use when user mentions diagram, flowchart, mermaid, ASCII diagram, text diagram, terminal diagram, visualize, C4, mindmap, architecture diagram, sequence diagram, ERD, or needs visual docume...
PostgreSQL bindings for H3 hexagonal grid system. Use when working with H3 cells in Postgres, including spatial indexing, geometry/geography integration, and raster analysis.
Context-Driven Development skill for projects using Conductor. Use this skill when you detect a `conductor/` directory in the project, when working on tasks defined in a `plan.md` file, or when the user asks about tracks, specs, or plans. Automatically applies TDD workflow, tracks task completion...
Display project status, active tracks, and next actions
Official Stakpak application containerization standard operating procedure, a step-by-step guidline to properly dockerize applications. This is a rule book curated by the Stakpak Team.
Generate, edit, and beat-sync AI video with leading models in one workspace.
The world's fastest calendar for remote work
Transform Your Design with AI Designer by ImgCreator.ai
Revolutionizing Video Production with AI-Powered Creativity
Extend an image past the frame and let AI fill the new aspect ratio.
Discover your celebrity doppelgänger with StarByFace!
ChainClarity explains 700+ crypto whitepapers in plain English, with layered summaries, comparisons, research tools, alerts, and a $4.99 Pro plan.
Opus.ai: Revolutionize Your Web Experience