derisk-sequencer

Solid

Turn a validated idea into a risk-ordered sequence of experiments and build steps, with one hard rule — no product code is scheduled before the test that de-risks it. Use whenever someone has an idea worth building and asks what to do in what order — "what should I build first", "what order do I tackle this", "sequence this plan", "de-risk this roadmap", or presents a build plan that front-loads construction ahead of validation. The method lists the load-bearing assumptions, scores each by risk divided by cost-to-test, orders experiments cheapest-decisive first with kill-gates between them, places every build step after its unlocking test, and defers governance, breadth, and optimization until their gates clear — then emits an ordered sequence and a linter that flags build-before-its-test. Distinct from task-decomposition and overwhelm-breakdown (which collapse a big task to one next step for momentum) and agent-orchestration (which sequences build phases); this sequences de-risking ahead of building.

AI & Automation 0 stars 0 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 78/100

Stars 20%
0
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# De-risk Sequencer Given something worth building, decide **what order to attack it in** so that the cheapest tests that could kill the project run before the expensive construction that assumes the project lives. The one rule everything serves: > **Every build step comes after the test that de-risks it. No construction before its validation.** This is the direct antidote to the most expensive mistake in software: build-first, validate-last. The pattern that wastes weeks is de-risking the parts that were never in doubt (can we build it? — usually yes) while the load-bearing doubt (is it needed? does it beat what exists? does the hard assumption hold?) sits untested until there's too much built to walk away from. --- ## Why this exists Risk doesn't retire evenly. A plan has a few assumptions that, if false, kill everything — and a lot of work that only matters if those hold. Sequencing by *what's easy to start* or *what's exciting* puts construction first and validation last, which is exactly backwards: you pay the big costs before learning whether they were warranted. Sequencing by **risk retired per unit cost** flips it. You spend the first, cheapest hours buying down the biggest uncertainties. Most plans that are going to fail, fail at a cheap test you could have run first — so running it first is nearly free insurance, and a NO here saves the entire build. ## When to reach for this vs neighbors - **task-decomposition / overwhelm-breakdown** collapse a big, vague...

Details

Author
scoobydrew83
Repository
scoobydrew83/skills
Created
1 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
Python
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category