Evaluate, score, approve or reject, implement, and stage GitHub feature requests for Aries AI. Use when a GitHub issue is classified as a feature, enhancement, idea, or product request that must be compared against current priorities before being built or closed with reasoning.
Scanned 9/9/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add DeliciousHouse/aries-app --skill feature-pipeline --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Feature Pipeline?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/delicioushouse-feature-pipeline)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: feature-pipeline
description: Evaluate, score, approve or reject, implement, and stage GitHub feature requests for Aries AI. Use when a GitHub issue is classified as a feature, enhancement, idea, or product request that must be compared against current priorities before being built or closed with reasoning.
---
# Feature Pipeline
Use this skill for GitHub issues that represent new features, enhancements, or product requests.
## Read this when needed
- Scoring rubric: `references/feature-evaluation-rubric.md`
## Required inputs
- GitHub issue number
- Repo root: `/app/aries-app`
- Feedback log: `data/feedback-processing-log.json`
## Required planning sources
Read these before deciding:
- `PRIORITIES.md`
- `generated/validated/project-progress.json`
- `generated/validated/canonical-roadmap-baseline.md`
## Required procedure
1. Confirm the issue record is pending in the feedback log:
- Inspect `data/feedback-processing-log.json` for the issue entry.
2. Inspect the issue in GitHub:
- `gh issue view <number> --repo DeliciousHouse/aries-app --json title,body,labels,comments,url`
3. Score the request:
- `effortHours`
- `impactScore`
- `alignmentScore`
4. Decide `approved` or `rejected`.
- Reject when it conflicts with the current roadmap, widens an unsupported surface, or is weakly aligned.
- Approval here means approved for implementation and staging only, never production.
5. If rejected:
- update the feedback log with the reasoning
- comment on the issue with a concise explanation
- close the issue
6. If approved:
- scope the work into a tight implementation slice
- create a branch named `feature/issue-<number>-<slug>`
- implement the feature
- run the most relevant tests
- deploy to staging using the project's staging deploy process; if none is configured, record `staging: none`
- comment on the issue with the scope summary and staging URL
- if useful, open a draft PR for review
7. Update `data/feedback-processing-log.json` so the record includes:
- `effortHours`
- `impactScore`
- `alignmentScore`
- `approvalDecision`
- `approvalReason`
- `branch`
- `stagingUrl`
- `status`
- `summaryPending`
## Guardrails
- All features require Brendan's approval before production shipping.
- Prefer rejection over stealth scope creep when the feature fights the current roadmap.
- Keep rationale concrete. Do not close requests with generic wording.
- Do not describe staging as production.
## Output format
Return only:
- `status:` success or failed
- `issue:` `#<number>`
- `decision:` approved or rejected
- `effort_hours:` number
- `impact:` 1-5
- `alignment:` 1-5
- `branch:` branch name or `none`
- `staging:` URL or `none`
- `reason:` short sentence
- `next_step:` short operator follow-up or `none`
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!