Feature Value Planning

Position in workflow: v0.3 Commercial Model → v0.3 Feature Value Planning → v0.4 User Journeys

Features are the unit of scope. Every feature must trace back to why it exists: outcome, moat, competitive position, or pricing tier.

Consumes

This skill requires prior work from v0.1-v0.3:

• CFD-* entries (customer feedback, from v0.1-v0.2) — Evidence for what users need/want

• KPI-* entries (outcome definitions, from v0.3 Outcome Definition) — What metrics does each feature support

• BR-* moat entries (from v0.3 Moat Definition) — What features defend our competitive position

• BR-* pricing entries (from v0.3 Pricing Model) — What features differentiate tiers

• Market landscape analysis (from v0.2) — Competitive feature comparison

This skill assumes v0.1-v0.2 research is complete and risk/tech decisions (v0.5) are not yet made.

Produces

This skill creates/updates:

• FEA-* entries (feature definitions, with confidence scoring) — Every feature in scope with traceability

• BR-FEA-* entries (governance rules for feature decisions) — Scope protection rules

• MVP-SCOPE artifact — Explicit list: "These X features (FEA-001, FEA-005, FEA-008) define our MVP"

• Example: MVP-SCOPE: 5 P0 features + 3 P1 features = 8 total. Rationale: Delivers value on [KPI-001, KPI-002]. Competitive parity [FEA-001-003], Delta [FEA-004], Pricing [FEA-005]

• This becomes the definition for v0.4 user journeys and v0.7 build scope

All FEA- entries include confidence:

• confidence: 2-3/5 (based on CFD- evidence strength)

• Evidence: "CFD-001, CFD-005, competitive-analysis"

• Forward target: "Would move to 4/5 if beta cohort uses it"

Feature Classification Framework

Type Definition Strategic Purpose Evidence Required

Moat Builds/defends competitive advantage Supports BR- moat rule High (CFD- proving differentiation)

Outcome Directly drives success metric Tied to KPI- entry High (KPI- link mandatory)

Parity Matches competitor baseline From Competitive Landscape Medium (CFD- competitor evidence)

Delta Differentiation from competitors Our advantage over market High (CFD- gap evidence)

Tier Differentiates pricing packages From Pricing BR- Medium (BR- tier assignment)

Table Stakes Expected but not differentiating Industry standard Low (common knowledge)

Rule: P0 features require Moat, Outcome, or Delta classification. Table Stakes alone cannot justify P0.

Product Type × Feature Strategy

Feature focus varies by product type (from v0.2 classification):

Product Type Primary Focus Parity Approach Delta Approach

Fast Follow Parity + focused delta 1:1 critical feature match Single compelling improvement

Innovation Moat-building features Minimal (new category) Core differentiation IS the product

Slice Segment-specific features Partial (niche needs differ) Deep fit for underserved segment

Fast Follow Constraint

BR-FEA-PARITY-FIRST: No delta features until parity features complete. Users compare to incumbent first.

Innovation Pattern

Moat features = 60%+ of scope. Table stakes minimized. Delta is the entire value proposition.

Slice Pattern

80/20 rule: Match 20% of incumbent features that serve 80% of niche use cases. Delta = niche-specific depth.

Priority Tier Criteria

Tier Criteria Evidence Threshold

P0 — Must Have Blocks launch without it; tied to primary KPI- or moat BR- CFD- proof + KPI-/BR- link

P1 — Should Have Meaningfully improves outcome; supports tier differentiation CFD- user signal

P2 — Nice to Have Enhances experience; no direct KPI impact Reasonable assumption OK

P3 — Defer/Cut Scope creep signal; can add post-launch None (remove from scope)

Kill criterion: If >40% of features are P2/P3, scope is bloated. Re-evaluate.

FEA- Output Template

Create FEA- entries in this format:

FEA-XXX: [Feature Name] Type: [Moat | Outcome | Parity | Delta | Tier | Table Stakes] Priority: [P0 | P1 | P2 | P3] Description: [What the feature does — user-facing capability] Outcome Link: [KPI-XXX this supports, or "N/A"] Moat Link: [BR-XXX moat rule this supports, or "N/A"] Pricing Link: [BR-XXX tier this belongs to, or "All tiers"] Competitor Comparison: [Parity with X | Delta vs X | Unique | Table stakes] Validation: [CFD-XXX evidence, or validation method] Acceptance Criteria: [Testable condition for "done"]

Example entries:

FEA-001: One-Click Scheduling Type: Parity Priority: P0 Description: Schedule meetings with single click from availability view Outcome Link: KPI-002 (activation rate) Moat Link: N/A Pricing Link: All tiers Competitor Comparison: Parity with Calendly Validation: CFD-012 (competitor feature audit) Acceptance Criteria: User completes scheduling in ≤3 clicks

FEA-002: Offline Mode Type: Delta Priority: P0 Description: Full functionality without internet connection Outcome Link: KPI-001 (TTFV for field users) Moat Link: BR-012 (moat: works anywhere) Pricing Link: BR-045 (Pro tier differentiator) Competitor Comparison: Delta vs Notion (requires connection) Validation: CFD-018 (user interviews: connectivity complaints) Acceptance Criteria: All core features function with 0 connectivity for 24h

BR-FEA- Governance Rules

Create governance rules for feature decisions:

BR-FEA-XXX: [Rule Name] Type: [Scope Protection | Prioritization Rule | Validation Gate] Rule: [Constraint statement] Rationale: [Why this rule exists] Enforcement: [When/how applied]

Standard rules to establish:

• BR-FEA-001: Outcome Link Required — P0/P1 features must link to KPI- entry

• BR-FEA-002: Validation Before Build — P0 features require CFD- evidence before development

• BR-FEA-003: Scope Freeze Gate — Feature list locked after v0.4; changes require EPIC

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Anti-Pattern Signal Fix

Feature creep P2/P3 > 40% of scope Cut ruthlessly; defer to backlog

Implementation masquerading as feature "Use Redis caching" Reframe as user outcome

Orphaned features No KPI-, BR-, or CFD- link Add traceability or cut

Assumption-based priority "Users will love this" Require CFD- evidence

Parity inflation Everything is "parity" Challenge: is competitor feature actually used?

Delta without moat Delta feature easy to copy Tie to defensible BR- moat

Downstream Connections

This skill's outputs feed into multiple downstream skills:

Consumer Consumes Purpose

v0.4 User Journeys FEA-* entries + MVP-SCOPE artifact Design journey paths through MVP features

v0.5 Red Team Review FEA-* entries Assess technical/risk feasibility of features

v0.6 Architecture FEA-* entries + MVP-SCOPE Design system that supports MVP features

v0.7 Build Execution FEA-* entries + MVP-SCOPE Define EPIC scope (which features = which EPICs)

v0.9 GTM FEA-* entries (especially Delta) Build launch messaging around delta features

Critical handoff: The MVP-SCOPE artifact is the boundary. Everything in the list goes to v0.4+. Everything outside gets deferred to post-launch backlog.

Detailed References

• Good/bad examples: See references/examples.md

• FEA- entry template: See assets/fea.md

• Competitive feature matrix: See assets/competitive-feature-matrix.md