Feature Investment AdvisorSAFE

Product Management skills framework built on battle-tested methods for Claude Code, Cowork, Codex, and AI agents.

The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.

---
name: feature-investment-advisor
argument-hint: "[feature to evaluate]"
description: Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment.
intent: >-
  Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math.
type: interactive
best_for:
  - "Assessing whether a feature should be built now"
  - "Comparing ROI and strategic value of feature ideas"
  - "Pressure-testing roadmap requests with financial logic"
scenarios:
  - "Should we build SSO for mid-market customers this quarter?"
  - "Evaluate whether an AI assistant feature is worth the investment"
  - "Help me decide if this roadmap request has enough ROI to build"
theme: finance-metrics
estimated_time: "15-25 min"
---


## Purpose

Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math.

This is not a generic prioritization framework—it's a financial lens for feature decisions that complements other prioritization methods (RICE, value vs. effort, user research). Use when financial impact is a key decision factor.

## Input

**Works best with:** The feature you're deciding on, in a sentence or two.
**Also useful:** Revenue connection (direct or indirect), rough cost inputs (dev time, COGS, ongoing OpEx), and the strategic argument being made for it.

Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended `ARGUMENTS:` line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.

**Arriving empty-handed? That works too.** The advisor opens by asking what the feature is and how it's supposed to make or save money.

**Example invocation:** `Should we build SSO/SAML? Enterprise deals keep stalling on it; est. 2 engineer-months plus ongoing support burden.`

## Key Concepts

### The Feature Investment Framework

A systematic approach to evaluate features financially:

1. **Revenue Connection** — How does this feature impact revenue?
   - Direct monetization (new tier, add-on, usage charges)
   - Indirect monetization (retention, conversion, expansion enablement)

2. **Cost Structure** — What does it cost to build and run?
   - Development cost (one-time investment)
   - COGS impact (ongoing infrastructure, processing)
   - OpEx impact (ongoing support, maintenance)

3. **ROI Calculation** — Is the return worth the investment?
   - Direct monetization: Revenue impact / Development cost
   - Retention features: LTV impact across customer base / Development cost
   - Factor in gross margin, not just revenue

4. **Strategic Value** — Non-financial value that might override pure ROI
   - Competitive moat (prevents churn to competitor)
   - Platform enabler (unlocks future features)
   - Market positioning (needed for enterprise deals)
   - Risk reduction (compliance, security)

### Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)

- **Not feature scoring alone:** Combines financial analysis with strategic judgment
- **Not revenue-only thinking:** Considers margins, costs, and ROI, not just top-line revenue
- **Not ignoring retention:** Indirect revenue impact (churn reduction) is equally valid
- **Not building without validation:** Assumes you've done discovery; this is the financial lens

### When to Use This Framework

**Use this when:**
- Prioritizing between features with quantifiable revenue/retention impact
- Evaluating expensive features (>1 engineer-month of work)
- Making build/buy/partner decisions
- Defending feature prioritization to stakeholders or leadership
- Choosing between direct monetization (add-on) vs. indirect (retention)

**Don't use this when:**
- Feature is table stakes (must-have for competitive parity)
- Impact is purely qualitative (brand, UX delight without measurable retention effect)
- You haven't validated the problem (do discovery first)
- Feature is < 1 week of work (just build it)

---

### Facilitation Source of Truth

Use [`workshop-facilitation`](../workshop-facilitation/SKILL.md) as the default interaction protocol for this skill.

It defines:
- session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
- one-question turns with plain-language prompts
- progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
- interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
- numbered recommendations at decision points
- quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include `Other (specify)` when useful)

This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.

## Application

This interactive skill asks **up to 4 adaptive questions**, offering **3-5 enumerated options** at decision points.

---

### Step 0: Gather Context

**Agent asks:**

"Let's evaluate the financial impact of this feature investment. Please provide:

**Feature description:**
- What's the feature? (1-2 sentences)
- Target customer segment (SMB, mid-market, enterprise, all)

**Current business context:**
- Current MRR/ARR (or customer count if pre-revenue)
- Current ARPU/ARPA
- Current monthly churn rate
- Gross margin %

**Constraints:**
- Development cost estimate (team size × time)
- Any ongoing COGS or OpEx implications?

You can provide estimates if you don't have exact numbers."

---

### Step 1: Identify Revenue Connection

**Agent asks:**

"How does this feature impact revenue? Choose the option t

SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.

What the source does

Filesystem

none-observed

Network

none-observed

Shell

none-observed

Dependencies

pinned

Secrets in source

none-found

Findings (0)

No findings outside the package's declared scope.

Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.