
work-intake
by nicepkg
๐ 170+ pre-built skills for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex & 14+ AI tools. Stop re-teaching your AI the same things. One command โ instant domain expertise. Marketing, SEO, Trading, Video, PM workflows included.
SKILL.md
name: work-intake description: Entry point for ALL work requests - triages scope from trivial to massive, asks clarifying questions, and routes to appropriate planning skills. Use this when receiving any new work request.
Work Intake
Overview
Every work request flows through intake. This skill determines scope, gathers requirements, and routes to the appropriate workflow.
Core principle: No work is too small to track, no work is too large to decompose.
Announce at start: "I'm using work-intake to understand and scope this request before beginning."
The Intake Flow
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ REQUEST RECEIVED โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฌโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ
โผ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ STEP 0: PROJECT BOARD READINESS (GATE) โ
โ Is GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM set? โ
โ Is project board accessible? โ
โ Are required fields configured? โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฌโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ
โผ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ CLARIFYING QUESTIONS โ
โ What is the user trying to achieve? โ
โ What does success look like? โ
โ What constraints exist? โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฌโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ
โผ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ SCOPE ASSESSMENT โ
โ How much investigation is needed? โ
โ How many deliverables? โ
โ How many unknowns? โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฌโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโผโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฌโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โผ โผ โผ โผ
โโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโ โโโโโโโโโโโโ
โTRIVIAL โ โ SMALL โ โ LARGE โ โ MASSIVE โ
โ โ โ โ โ โ โ โ
โ1 issue โ โ1-3 issuesโ โ1 epic โ โInitiativeโ
โno unkn.โ โfew unkn. โ โresearch โ โmulti-epicโ
โโโโโฌโโโโโ โโโโโโฌโโโโโโ โโโโโโฌโโโโโโ โโโโโโฌโโโโโโ
โ โ โ โ
โผ โผ โผ โผ
issue-prerequisite issue-prerequisite epic-management initiative-
+ project-board- + decomposition + research spikes architecture
enforcement + project-board- + project-board- + project-board-
enforcement enforcement enforcement
Step 0: Project Board Readiness (GATE)
Before any work intake, verify project board infrastructure is ready.
This is a gate. Do not proceed to clarifying questions until this passes.
# Derive defaults from GITHUB_PROJECT if provided
if [ -z "$GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM" ] && [ -n "$GITHUB_PROJECT" ]; then
NUM_CANDIDATE=$(echo "$GITHUB_PROJECT" | sed -E 's#.*/projects/([0-9]+).*#\1#')
if [ -n "$NUM_CANDIDATE" ] && [ "$NUM_CANDIDATE" != "$GITHUB_PROJECT" ]; then
export GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM="$NUM_CANDIDATE"
echo "Derived GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM=$GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM from GITHUB_PROJECT"
fi
fi
if [ -z "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" ] && [ -n "$GITHUB_OWNER" ]; then
export GH_PROJECT_OWNER="$GITHUB_OWNER"
echo "Derived GH_PROJECT_OWNER=$GH_PROJECT_OWNER from GITHUB_OWNER"
fi
if [ -z "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" ] && [ -n "$GITHUB_PROJECT" ]; then
OWNER_CANDIDATE=$(echo "$GITHUB_PROJECT" | sed -E 's#https://github.com/(orgs|users)/([^/]+)/projects/[0-9]+#\2#')
if [ -n "$OWNER_CANDIDATE" ] && [ "$OWNER_CANDIDATE" != "$GITHUB_PROJECT" ]; then
export GH_PROJECT_OWNER="$OWNER_CANDIDATE"
echo "Derived GH_PROJECT_OWNER=$GH_PROJECT_OWNER from GITHUB_PROJECT"
fi
fi
if [ -z "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" ]; then
REMOTE_URL=$(git remote get-url origin 2>/dev/null || true)
OWNER_CANDIDATE=$(echo "$REMOTE_URL" | sed -E 's#(git@|https://)github.com[:/]+([^/]+)/[^/]+(\.git)?#\2#')
if [ -n "$OWNER_CANDIDATE" ] && [ "$OWNER_CANDIDATE" != "$REMOTE_URL" ]; then
export GH_PROJECT_OWNER="$OWNER_CANDIDATE"
echo "Derived GH_PROJECT_OWNER=$GH_PROJECT_OWNER from git remote"
fi
fi
# Verify environment variables are set
if [ -z "$GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM" ]; then
echo "BLOCKED: GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM not set"
echo "Set with: export GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM=<number>"
exit 1
fi
if [ -z "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" ]; then
echo "BLOCKED: GH_PROJECT_OWNER not set"
echo "Set with: export GH_PROJECT_OWNER=@me # or org name"
exit 1
fi
# Verify project is accessible
if ! gh project view "$GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM" --owner "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" --format json > /dev/null 2>&1; then
echo "BLOCKED: Cannot access project $GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM"
echo "Verify project exists and you have access"
exit 1
fi
# Verify required fields exist
FIELDS=$(gh project field-list "$GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM" --owner "$GH_PROJECT_OWNER" --format json | jq -r '.fields[].name')
for required in "Status" "Priority"; do
if ! echo "$FIELDS" | grep -q "^$required$"; then
echo "WARNING: Required field '$required' not found in project"
echo "Consider adding this field for full tracking support"
fi
done
if ! echo "$FIELDS" | grep -q "^Type$" && ! echo "$FIELDS" | grep -q "^Issue Type$"; then
echo "WARNING: Required field 'Type' (or 'Issue Type') not found in project"
echo "Consider adding this field for full tracking support"
fi
echo "Project board ready: $GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM"
If gate fails:
- Configure missing environment variables
- Create project board if needed
- Add required fields (Status, Type, Priority)
- Re-run readiness check
Skill: project-board-enforcement
Step 1: Clarifying Questions
Before scoping, understand the request.
Do not ask questions that can be answered from the repo. First inspect:
README.md,FEATURES.md,BRANDING.md,docs/, Storybook, and existing routes/pages- Existing GitHub issues and project board items
Only ask the user for information that is still missing after reviewing the repo.
Essential Questions
| Question | Purpose |
|---|---|
| "What are you trying to achieve?" | Understand the goal, not just the task |
| "What does success look like?" | Define acceptance criteria |
| "Who/what is affected?" | Identify scope of impact |
| "Are there constraints I should know about?" | Time, tech, compatibility |
| "Is this part of something larger?" | Link to existing initiatives |
Discovery Questions (for unclear requests)
| Question | Reveals |
|---|---|
| "Can you walk me through how this would be used?" | User journey, edge cases |
| "What exists today?" | Starting point, migration needs |
| "What have you already tried?" | Failed approaches, constraints |
| "Is there prior art or examples?" | Design direction |
Step 2: Scope Assessment
Evaluate the request against these criteria:
Scope Matrix
| Factor | Trivial | Small | Large | Massive |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unknowns | None | Few, answerable | Many, need research | Extensive, need spikes |
| Deliverables | 1 thing | 2-5 things | 6-20 things | 20+ things |
| Code areas | 1-2 files | 3-10 files | 10+ files | Multiple systems |
| Dependencies | None | Internal only | External services | New infrastructure |
| Duration | < 1 session | 1-3 sessions | 1-2 weeks | Weeks to months |
| Criteria | 1-2 | 3-5 | 6-15 | 15+ |
Scope Decision
IF unknowns == none AND deliverables <= 2:
โ TRIVIAL: Use issue-prerequisite directly
IF unknowns == few AND deliverables <= 5:
โ SMALL: Use issue-prerequisite, maybe issue-decomposition
IF unknowns == many OR deliverables > 5:
โ LARGE: Use epic-management with research spikes
IF unknowns == extensive OR deliverables > 20 OR new_infrastructure:
โ MASSIVE: Use initiative-architecture
Step 3: Route to Appropriate Workflow
Trivial Scope
**Assessment:** This is a trivial request (single deliverable, no unknowns).
**Next step:** Creating a single issue using `issue-prerequisite`.
Route to: issue-prerequisite
Small Scope
**Assessment:** This is a small request (few deliverables, minimal unknowns).
**Plan:**
1. Create parent issue for the request
2. If needed, decompose into 2-3 sub-issues
3. Begin implementation
**Next step:** Creating issue structure using `issue-prerequisite`.
Route to: issue-prerequisite โ maybe issue-decomposition
Large Scope
**Assessment:** This is a large request requiring structured planning.
**Unknowns identified:**
- [ ] Unknown 1 - needs investigation
- [ ] Unknown 2 - needs research spike
**High-level deliverables:**
1. Deliverable A
2. Deliverable B
...
**Next step:** Creating epic structure using `epic-management`.
Route to: epic-management (which will create research spikes as needed)
Massive Scope
**Assessment:** This is a massive request requiring full initiative architecture.
**Why massive:**
- [Reason: extensive unknowns / new infrastructure / multi-system / etc.]
**Initial unknowns:**
- [ ] Does X exist?
- [ ] How does Y work?
- [ ] What are constraints of Z?
**Potential scope:**
- Multiple epics likely
- New capabilities needed
- Significant research required
**Next step:** Beginning initiative architecture using `initiative-architecture`.
Route to: initiative-architecture
Resumability Checkpoint
Before routing, document the intake in memory:
# Store intake assessment
mcp__memory__create_entities([{
"name": "Intake-[DATE]-[SHORT_DESC]",
"entityType": "WorkIntake",
"observations": [
"Request: [Original request]",
"Scope: [Trivial/Small/Large/Massive]",
"Unknowns: [List]",
"Route: [Target skill]",
"Status: [Routing/In Progress/Complete]"
]
}])
Examples
Example: Trivial
Request: "Make the login page button a little lighter."
Intake:
- Goal: Adjust button color
- Success: Button is lighter
- Unknowns: None (CSS change)
- Deliverables: 1 (color change)
- Scope: TRIVIAL
โ Route to issue-prerequisite
Example: Large
Request: "Add dark mode to the application."
Intake:
- Goal: Theme switching capability
- Success: Users can toggle dark/light mode
- Unknowns:
- Current theming approach?
- Component library support?
- Persistence mechanism?
- Deliverables: ~10 (theme tokens, components, toggle, persistence, etc.)
- Scope: LARGE
โ Route to epic-management
Example: Massive
Request: "Add the ability for users to log in by clicking on a popup in their phone."
Intake:
- Goal: Mobile push notification login
- Success: User receives push, taps, logged in
- Unknowns:
- Is there a mobile app? โ Research spike
- Push notification infrastructure? โ Research spike
- Authentication flow design? โ Research spike
- Security requirements? โ Research spike
- Deliverables: 30+ (app work, backend, auth, notifications, etc.)
- Scope: MASSIVE
โ Route to initiative-architecture
Red Flags That Indicate Larger Scope
Watch for these phrases that suggest the request is larger than it appears:
| Phrase | Likely Scope |
|---|---|
| "Just add..." + new capability | Large (new capability = infrastructure) |
| "Users should be able to..." | Large (user-facing = full stack) |
| "Integrate with..." | Large (external = API, auth, error handling) |
| "Like [other product]..." | Massive (feature parity = extensive) |
| "Mobile/app/notification" | Massive (unless app exists) |
| "Real-time/sync/live" | Large (infrastructure) |
Never Turn Away Work
No matter how massive the request:
- Acknowledge the goal - "I understand you want X"
- Explain the process - "This will require structured planning"
- Begin investigation - Start with what we don't know
- Document everything - Every decision, every finding
- Break it down - Until we have tractable pieces
The path from "massive request" to "implementation" is:
Massive Request
โ Initiative Architecture (document unknowns, create research spikes)
โ Research Spikes (answer unknowns)
โ Epic Structure (group deliverables)
โ Issue Decomposition (create tractable tasks)
โ Implementation (one issue at a time)
Checklist
- Project board readiness verified (Step 0 gate passed)
- GITHUB_PROJECT_NUM and GH_PROJECT_OWNER set
- Asked clarifying questions
- Understood the goal (not just the task)
- Identified unknowns
- Counted deliverables
- Assessed scope (Trivial/Small/Large/Massive)
- Documented intake in memory
- Routed to appropriate skill (with project-board-enforcement)
Skill: project-board-enforcement
Gate: Cannot proceed to any downstream skill without project board readiness verified.
Score
Total Score
Based on repository quality metrics
SKILL.mdใใกใคใซใๅซใพใใฆใใ
ใฉใคใปใณในใ่จญๅฎใใใฆใใ
100ๆๅญไปฅไธใฎ่ชฌๆใใใ
GitHub Stars 100ไปฅไธ
1ใถๆไปฅๅ ใซๆดๆฐ
10ๅไปฅไธใใฉใผใฏใใใฆใใ
ใชใผใใณIssueใ50ๆชๆบ
ใใญใฐใฉใใณใฐ่จ่ชใ่จญๅฎใใใฆใใ
1ใคไปฅไธใฎใฟใฐใ่จญๅฎใใใฆใใ
Reviews
Reviews coming soon
