Goal Alignment

Goal-Alignment Skill

Purpose

This skill implements Shannon Framework's quantitative goal-wave alignment validation system. It calculates 0-100% alignment scores between wave deliverables and goal milestones, detects scope drift, and enforces goal consistency throughout wave execution.

Core Value: Prevents wasted effort by ensuring every wave delivers against actual goal milestones, not assumed requirements.

When to Use

Use this skill in these situations:

MANDATORY (Must Use):

• Before wave execution (pre-wave validation)
• After wave completion (post-wave verification)
• When user adds features mid-project (scope drift detection)
• When wave plan created (validate wave-goal alignment)

RECOMMENDED (Should Use):

• Complex projects (complexity >= 0.50)
• Multi-wave projects (>= 3 waves)
• Projects with vague initial goals

CONDITIONAL (May Use):

• Single-wave projects (for goal clarity validation)
• Retrospective analysis (alignment trending over time)

DO NOT rationalize skipping goal-alignment because:

• ❌ "This wave is obviously aligned" → Assumptions cause drift
• ❌ "Goal is simple, no validation needed" → Simple goals still drift
• ❌ "Alignment check is overhead" → 30 seconds vs hours of rework
• ❌ "We're close enough" → "Close" = partial credit = incomplete milestone
• ❌ "User didn't ask for validation" → Alignment is framework responsibility

Core Competencies

1. Alignment Scoring: Calculates 0-100% score between wave deliverables and goal milestones
2. Drift Detection: Identifies when waves diverge from goal structure
3. Scope Monitoring: Alerts on implicit goal expansion (features not in milestones)
4. Qualitative Quantification: Forces vague goals into measurable criteria
5. Pre/Post Wave Validation: Quality gates before and after wave execution
6. Recommendation Engine: Suggests continue/adjust/halt based on alignment score

Inputs

Required:

• mode (string): Operation mode
  • "validate": Validate wave-goal alignment (pre-wave)
  • "verify": Verify wave deliverables (post-wave)
  • "detect-drift": Check for scope drift
  • "quantify": Force quantification of qualitative goals

Mode-Specific Inputs:

For "validate" mode (pre-wave):

• wave_number (integer): Wave being validated
• wave_deliverables (array): List of deliverable descriptions
• goal_id (string): Active goal from goal-management

For "verify" mode (post-wave):

• wave_number (integer): Completed wave
• actual_deliverables (array): What was actually delivered
• goal_id (string): Active goal

For "detect-drift" mode:

• goal_id (string): Active goal
• conversation_context (optional): Recent messages to scan

For "quantify" mode:

• goal_text (string): Vague goal to quantify
• domain (optional): Project domain for context

Workflow

Mode: VALIDATE - Pre-Wave Alignment Check

Purpose: Prevent misaligned wave execution by validating BEFORE work begins

Step 1: Retrieve Active Goal

• Tool: Serena MCP via goal-management skill
• Action: Load goal with milestones structure
• Validation: Goal exists and has milestones

Step 2: Extract Wave Deliverables

• Input: wave_deliverables array (from wave plan)
• Example: ["OAuth 2.0 integration", "User registration UI", "Session management"]
• Normalize: Convert to comparable format

Step 3: Map Deliverables to Milestones

• Process: For each deliverable, find best-matching milestone
• Algorithm:
  1. Tokenize deliverable and milestone descriptions
  2. Calculate semantic similarity (keyword overlap)
  3. Score: exact match (1.0), partial match (0.3-0.9), no match (0.0)
  4. Map deliverable → milestone with highest score

Step 4: Calculate Alignment Score

• Formula:

  alignment_score = (sum(deliverable_milestone_matches) / count(deliverables)) * 100
  
  Where:
  - deliverable_milestone_matches = similarity score per deliverable (0.0-1.0)
  - Perfect alignment = 100% (all deliverables map to milestones)
  - No alignment = 0% (no deliverables match milestones)
  

Step 5: Check for Excess Deliverables

• Detection: Deliverables with NO milestone match (score = 0.0)
• Alert: "⚠️ Wave includes work not in goal: [deliverable_list]"
• Recommendation: "Add milestone OR remove deliverable"

Step 6: Check for Scope Mismatch

• Detection: Wave targets wrong milestone
• Example: Wave 2 should deliver "Payments" but targets "Admin Panel"
• Alert: "⚠️ Wave 2 targets Milestone 4, expected Milestone 2"
• Recommendation: "Reorder waves OR update goal milestone sequence"

Step 7: Generate Recommendation

• Thresholds:
  • alignment >= 90%: CONTINUE (green light)
  • 70% <= alignment < 90%: ADJUST (review deliverables)
  • alignment < 70%: HALT (major misalignment)

Step 8: Output Report

• Display:
  • Wave number
  • Alignment score (0-100%)
  • Deliverable-milestone mapping
  • Recommendation (continue/adjust/halt)
  • Action items (if adjust/halt)

Mode: VERIFY - Post-Wave Deliverable Check

Purpose: Confirm completed wave actually delivered against goal milestone

Step 1: Retrieve Goal Progress

• Tool: Serena MCP via goal-management skill
• Load: Current goal state with milestone completion status

Step 2: Load Wave Deliverables

• Input: actual_deliverables (what was delivered)
• Example: ["OAuth implemented", "Login UI complete", "Tests passing"]

Step 3: Validate Milestone Completion

• Process: Check if deliverables satisfy milestone criteria
• For each deliverable:
  1. Map to milestone (same algorithm as validate mode)
  2. Check completion criteria met
  3. Example: "Tests passing" satisfies "Functional tests pass"

Step 4: Calculate Deliverable Coverage

• Formula:

  coverage_score = (milestones_completed / milestones_targeted) * 100
  
  Where:
  - milestones_completed = count of milestones with satisfied criteria
  - milestones_targeted = count of milestones wave intended to complete
  

Step 5: Detect Incomplete Milestones

• Check: Were all targeted milestones completed?
• Alert: "⚠️ Milestone [name] incomplete: [missing_criteria]"
• Recommendation: "Add follow-up wave OR adjust milestone scope"

Step 6: Update Goal Progress

• Action: Mark milestones complete if criteria satisfied
• Tool: goal-management skill update mode
• Trigger: Automatic goal progress recalculation

Step 7: Output Verification Report

• Display:
  • Wave number
  • Coverage score (0-100%)
  • Milestones completed
  • Milestones incomplete (if any)
  • Goal progress update (+X%)

Mode: DETECT-DRIFT - Scope Drift Detection

Purpose: Catch implicit scope expansion before it becomes permanent

Step 1: Load Active Goal

• Tool: Serena MCP via goal-management
• Load: Goal with original milestone list

Step 2: Scan Conversation Context

• Input: Recent messages (last 20-30 messages)
• Search: Feature mentions, new requirements, scope additions
• Example: User says "Add social login" during auth wave

Step 3: Extract Implicit Features

• Process: Identify features NOT in original milestones
• Detection patterns:
  • "Add [feature]" → New feature mention
  • "Also need [feature]" → Scope addition
  • "What about [feature]?" → Potential expansion
• Filter: Exclude features already in milestones

Step 4: Calculate Scope Expansion

• Formula:

  expansion_ratio = (new_features / original_milestones) * 100
  
  Thresholds:
  - expansion <= 20%: Normal (minor clarifications)
  - 20% < expansion <= 50%: Moderate (review recommended)
  - expansion > 50%: High (alert required)
  

Step 5: Generate Drift Alert

• If expansion > 20%:
  • Alert: "⚠️ Scope expanded by X% ([count] new features detected)"
  • List: New features not in goal
  • Recommendation: "Update goal with /shannon:north_star update"

Step 6: Recommend Action

• Options:
  1. Update goal: Add new features as milestones (recalculate weights)
  2. Defer: Move features to backlog/future goal
  3. Reject: Clarify features out of scope

Mode: QUANTIFY - Force Qualitative Quantification

Purpose: Convert vague/qualitative goals into measurable criteria

Step 1: Parse Goal Text

• Input: Vague goal (e.g., "Make platform more scalable")
• Detection: Identify qualitative terms
  • "scalable", "performant", "better", "quality", "good"
  • "fast", "reliable", "user-friendly", "robust"

Step 2: Extract Implicit Metrics

• Process: Map qualitative term to measurable criteria
• Mapping:
  • "scalable" → users/second, requests/second, max concurrent users
  • "performant" → response time (ms), throughput (req/s), p95 latency
  • "better" → compare current vs target (20% improvement)
  • "quality" → test coverage (%), bug density, code review pass rate
  • "user-friendly" → task completion time, error rate, user satisfaction score

Step 3: Prompt for Quantification

• Action: Ask user to specify metrics
• Example:

  You said: "Make platform more scalable"
  
  Quantify "scalable":
  - Current: 100 concurrent users
  - Target: ____ concurrent users?
  
  OR:
  - Response time: ____ ms (p95)?
  - Throughput: ____ requests/second?
  

Step 4: Validate Quantified Criteria

• Check: Numbers provided and testable
• Example: "Support 10,000 concurrent users" → testable via load testing
• Reject: Still vague (e.g., "A lot of users" → not quantified)

Step 5: Store Quantified Goal

• Action: Update goal with measurable criteria
• Tool: goal-management skill (update mode)
• Result: Goal milestone with testable completion criteria

Step 6: Output Quantified Goal

• Display:
  • Original: "Make platform more scalable"
  • Quantified: "Support 10,000 concurrent users with p95 < 200ms"
  • Success Criteria: "Load test passes with 10K users, p95 latency < 200ms"

Alignment Scoring Algorithm

Core Formula:

alignment_score = (Σ(deliverable_similarity_i) / count(deliverables)) * 100

Where:
  deliverable_similarity_i = keyword_overlap(deliverable_i, best_matching_milestone)

  keyword_overlap(A, B) = |tokens(A) ∩ tokens(B)| / |tokens(A) ∪ tokens(B)|

  Scores:
  - 1.0 = Perfect match (all keywords overlap)
  - 0.7-0.9 = Strong match (most keywords overlap)
  - 0.3-0.6 = Partial match (some keywords overlap)
  - 0.0-0.2 = No match (minimal/no overlap)

Example Calculation:

Goal milestone: "User Authentication with email/password" Wave deliverable: "OAuth 2.0 social login"

Tokenization:

• Milestone tokens: {user, authentication, email, password}
• Deliverable tokens: {oauth, social, login}

Overlap:

• Intersection: {login} (authentication ≈ login)
• Union: {user, authentication, email, password, oauth, social, login}
• Similarity: 1 / 7 = 0.14 (14%)

Result: Poor alignment (wrong auth type)

Thresholds:

• alignment >= 90%: GREEN (proceed)
• 70% <= alignment < 90%: YELLOW (review)
• alignment < 70%: RED (halt)

Adjustment Factors:

• Exact feature match: +20% bonus
• Technology stack match: +10% bonus
• Scope overage (extra features): -15% penalty per excess deliverable

Anti-Rationalization Section

🚨 PROTOCOL ENFORCEMENT 🚨

This section addresses every rationalization pattern from RED phase baseline:

Rationalization 1: "This wave is obviously aligned"

Detection: Wave plan created without explicit validation

Violation: Skip alignment check for "clear" cases

Counter-Argument:

• "OAuth = auth" may be wrong (goal needs email/password)
• "Obvious" assumptions cause 40% of wave rework
• Validation cost: 30 seconds. Rework cost: hours
• RED Phase Scenario 1: OAuth delivered when goal needed basic auth

Protocol: Validate ALL waves, regardless of perceived clarity. Run alignment scoring.

Rationalization 2: "Goal is simple, no validation needed"

Detection: Single-milestone goal, validation skipped

Violation: Assume simple goals don't drift

Counter-Argument:

• Even 1-milestone goals accumulate scope
• "Simple" goals often vague (no measurable criteria)
• Drift detection catches implicit expansions
• RED Phase Scenario 3: "Add admin panel" never added to goal

Protocol: Validate all goals, complexity-independent. Simple goals still need alignment.

Rationalization 3: "Alignment check is overhead"

Detection: Time pressure, skip validation to "move faster"

Violation: Trade validation for perceived speed

Counter-Argument:

• Alignment check: 30 seconds per wave
• Misaligned wave rework: hours to days
• 1 misalignment = 10+ alignment checks time cost
• Prevention cheaper than cure
• RED Phase Scenario 6: Over-engineered enterprise auth wasted time

Protocol: Alignment checks are mandatory infrastructure, not optional overhead.

Rationalization 4: "We're close enough"

Detection: Alignment score 60-80%, proceed anyway

Violation: Accept partial alignment as "good enough"

Counter-Argument:

• 70% alignment = 30% wasted effort
• Partial credit ≠ milestone completion
• Goal progress calculation breaks (inflated percentages)
• "Close" compounds over multiple waves (drift accumulates)
• RED Phase Scenario 2: Assumed Stripe = payments (ignored other providers)

Protocol: Minimum 90% alignment required. Below threshold triggers review.

Rationalization 5: "User didn't ask for validation"

Detection: Wave execution without user-requested validation

Violation: Treat alignment as optional feature

Counter-Argument:

• Alignment is framework responsibility, not user's job
• Users assume waves match goals (like file saves)
• Shannon Framework mandate: goal-driven execution
• Silent drift = broken contract with user
• RED Phase Scenario 4: Wave 2 executed admin dashboard instead of payments

Protocol: Alignment validation is automatic framework behavior, not opt-in feature.

Rationalization 6: "Scope drift is natural evolution"

Detection: Features added without goal updates, accepted as normal

Violation: Treat scope expansion as inevitable

Counter-Argument:

• Scope drift ≠ evolution (evolution is intentional, drift is accidental)
• Untracked scope breaks progress metrics
• Goal completion becomes ambiguous
• Drift hides in "clarifications" and "minor additions"
• RED Phase Scenario 3: Admin panel added, goal never updated (progress stuck)

Protocol: All scope changes update goal explicitly. Drift detection alerts on 20%+ expansion.

Enforcement Mechanism

This skill is QUANTITATIVE type with mandatory invocation:

• Before wave execution → validate mode
• After wave completion → verify mode
• Mid-project feature adds → detect-drift mode
• Vague goals → quantify mode (before goal-management storage)

Violation Detection: If you find yourself thinking:

• "This wave is obviously aligned"
• "Goal is simple, no validation needed"
• "Alignment check is overhead"
• "We're close enough" (< 90% score)
• "User didn't ask for validation"
• "Scope drift is natural"

STOP. You are rationalizing. Return to workflow. Run alignment scoring.

Enhanced Anti-Rationalization Rules (From Pressure Testing)

These rules close loopholes identified during REFACTOR phase adversarial testing:

1. No Threshold Rounding:

   • 88% alignment ≠ 90% (no rounding)
   • Scores are exact (two decimal places)
   • No "close enough" exception

2. No Similarity Inflation:

   • Similarity = exact keyword overlap only
   • Formula: |tokens(A) ∩ tokens(B)| / |tokens(A) ∪ tokens(B)|
   • No semantic interpretation ("dashboard = payments" rejected)

3. No Partial Completion:

   • Milestones are 100% complete OR incomplete
   • No "mostly complete" credit
   • All criteria must be satisfied

4. Cumulative Drift Tracking:

   • Track drift across all waves: sum(drift_per_wave)
   • Alert if cumulative > 20% (even if individual waves < 20%)
   • Store: drift_history in goal metadata

5. Vague Term Blacklist:

   • Reject: "more", "better", "higher", "a lot", "many", "few"
   • Require: Specific numbers (e.g., "10,000 users", "< 100ms")
   • Validation: Regex check for numeric values

6. High Drift Blocks:

   • Drift > 50% prevents next wave execution
   • Hard blocker until goal updated
   • No "defer update" option

7. Excess Deliverable Threshold:

   • Similarity < 0.30 = excess deliverable
   • Flag for removal OR goal expansion
   • No "related work" rationalization

8. Wave Reordering Detection:

   • Track expected wave sequence
   • Alert if executed out of order
   • Require validation on reordering

9. Exact Technology Match:

   • "Stripe" ≠ "PayPal" (no substitution)
   • Tech match bonus only for exact match
   • Goal-specified tech is mandatory

10. Drift Persistence:

    • Store drift_per_wave in Serena
    • Query cumulative drift before each wave
    • Alert on cumulative threshold breach

Pressure Test Validation: These rules passed 10/10 adversarial scenarios (REFACTOR phase)

Outputs

For "validate" mode:

{
  "success": true,
  "mode": "validate",
  "wave_number": 2,
  "alignment_score": 92,
  "threshold": "GREEN",
  "recommendation": "CONTINUE",
  "deliverable_mapping": [
    {
      "deliverable": "Stripe integration",
      "milestone": "Payment Processing",
      "similarity": 0.95,
      "status": "aligned"
    },
    {
      "deliverable": "Checkout UI",
      "milestone": "Payment Processing",
      "similarity": 0.88,
      "status": "aligned"
    }
  ],
  "excess_deliverables": [],
  "action_items": [],
  "validation": "Wave 2 aligns with Payment Processing milestone. Proceed."
}

For "verify" mode:

{
  "success": true,
  "mode": "verify",
  "wave_number": 2,
  "coverage_score": 100,
  "milestones_completed": ["Payment Processing"],
  "milestones_incomplete": [],
  "goal_progress_update": {
    "before": 40,
    "after": 70,
    "change": "+30%"
  },
  "verification": "Wave 2 completed Payment Processing milestone. Goal 70% complete."
}

For "detect-drift" mode:

{
  "success": true,
  "mode": "detect-drift",
  "drift_detected": true,
  "expansion_ratio": 33,
  "threshold": "MODERATE",
  "new_features": [
    "Social login integration",
    "Password reset flow",
    "Email verification"
  ],
  "original_milestones": 3,
  "new_features_count": 1,
  "recommendation": "UPDATE_GOAL",
  "alert": "⚠️ Scope expanded by 33% (1 new feature detected)",
  "action": "Run /shannon:north_star update to add new milestone"
}

For "quantify" mode:

{
  "success": true,
  "mode": "quantify",
  "original_goal": "Make platform more scalable",
  "qualitative_terms": ["scalable"],
  "quantified_goal": "Support 10,000 concurrent users with p95 latency < 200ms",
  "metrics": [
    {
      "term": "scalable",
      "metric": "concurrent_users",
      "target": 10000,
      "test_method": "Load testing with JMeter"
    },
    {
      "term": "scalable",
      "metric": "p95_latency",
      "target": 200,
      "unit": "ms",
      "test_method": "Performance profiling"
    }
  ],
  "success_criteria": "Load test passes with 10K users, p95 < 200ms"
}

Success Criteria

This skill succeeds if:

1. ✅ Alignment Scored: All waves validated with 0-100% score before execution
2. ✅ Drift Detected: Scope expansion > 20% triggers alert
3. ✅ Rationalizations Blocked: "Obviously aligned" assumptions prevented
4. ✅ Qualitative Goals Quantified: Vague goals forced into measurable criteria
5. ✅ Wave-Goal Mapping: Every deliverable maps to milestone with similarity score
6. ✅ Recommendations Generated: continue/adjust/halt based on alignment threshold

Validation:

def validate_goal_alignment(wave, goal):
    # Check 1: Alignment score calculated
    result = skill.validate(wave_number=wave.number, goal_id=goal.id)
    assert "alignment_score" in result
    assert 0 <= result["alignment_score"] <= 100

    # Check 2: Threshold recommendation
    assert result["recommendation"] in ["CONTINUE", "ADJUST", "HALT"]
    if result["alignment_score"] >= 90:
        assert result["recommendation"] == "CONTINUE"
    elif result["alignment_score"] < 70:
        assert result["recommendation"] == "HALT"

    # Check 3: Deliverable mapping
    assert "deliverable_mapping" in result
    for mapping in result["deliverable_mapping"]:
        assert 0.0 <= mapping["similarity"] <= 1.0
        assert mapping["milestone"] in goal.milestones

    # Check 4: Drift detection
    drift = skill.detect_drift(goal_id=goal.id)
    if drift["new_features_count"] > 0:
        assert drift["expansion_ratio"] > 0
        assert drift["recommendation"] in ["UPDATE_GOAL", "DEFER", "REJECT"]

Common Pitfalls

Pitfall 1: Accepting Partial Alignment

Wrong:

Alignment score: 72%
Claude: "Close enough, proceeding with wave."

Right:

Alignment score: 72% (threshold: 70%)
Claude: "⚠️ YELLOW threshold. Review deliverables:
- Deliverable 'Admin UI' has 0.2 similarity to goal milestones
- Recommend: Remove admin UI OR add Admin milestone to goal"

Why: Partial alignment accumulates drift over multiple waves.

Pitfall 2: Skipping Drift Detection

Wrong:

User: "Add social login"
Claude: [Adds feature without goal update]

Right:

User: "Add social login"
Claude: [Runs detect-drift]
"⚠️ New feature detected not in goal. Options:
1. Update goal: Add 'Social Login' milestone (+15% weight)
2. Defer: Add to backlog for future goal
3. Reject: Clarify out of scope"

Why: Untracked scope breaks progress metrics and goal completion clarity.

Pitfall 3: Vague Alignment Reasoning

Wrong:

Alignment: "Wave 2 seems to match the goal"
[No score, no mapping, subjective assessment]

Right:

Alignment Score: 94%
Mapping:
- "Stripe integration" → "Payment Processing" (0.95 similarity)
- "Checkout UI" → "Payment Processing" (0.88 similarity)
Recommendation: CONTINUE (GREEN threshold)

Why: Quantitative scoring eliminates subjective "seems like" reasoning.

Examples

Example 1: Pre-Wave Validation (GREEN)

Input:

{
  "mode": "validate",
  "wave_number": 1,
  "wave_deliverables": [
    "Email/password authentication",
    "User registration form",
    "Login session management"
  ],
  "goal_id": "GOAL-20251103T143000"
}

Goal Context:

• Milestone 1: "User Authentication" (40% weight)
• Criteria: "Users can register and login via email/password"

Process:

1. Load goal milestone
2. Map deliverables:
   • "Email/password authentication" → "User Authentication" (similarity: 0.98)
   • "User registration form" → "User Authentication" (similarity: 0.92)
   • "Login session management" → "User Authentication" (similarity: 0.88)
3. Calculate: (0.98 + 0.92 + 0.88) / 3 = 0.93 = 93%
4. Threshold: 93% >= 90% → GREEN

Output:

{
  "alignment_score": 93,
  "threshold": "GREEN",
  "recommendation": "CONTINUE",
  "validation": "Wave 1 highly aligned with User Authentication milestone"
}

Example 2: Pre-Wave Validation (RED)

Input:

{
  "mode": "validate",
  "wave_number": 2,
  "wave_deliverables": [
    "Admin dashboard",
    "User management UI",
    "Analytics dashboard"
  ],
  "goal_id": "GOAL-20251103T143000"
}

Goal Context:

• Milestone 2: "Payment Processing" (30% weight)
• Criteria: "Users can checkout with credit cards"

Process:

1. Map deliverables:
   • "Admin dashboard" → "Payment Processing" (similarity: 0.10)
   • "User management UI" → "Payment Processing" (similarity: 0.05)
   • "Analytics dashboard" → "Payment Processing" (similarity: 0.08)
2. Calculate: (0.10 + 0.05 + 0.08) / 3 = 0.08 = 8%
3. Threshold: 8% < 70% → RED

Output:

{
  "alignment_score": 8,
  "threshold": "RED",
  "recommendation": "HALT",
  "alert": "⚠️ Wave 2 misaligned with goal",
  "action_items": [
    "Wave 2 targets admin features, goal expects Payment Processing",
    "Reorder: Move admin to later wave",
    "OR: Update goal to prioritize admin before payments"
  ]
}

Example 3: Drift Detection

Input:

{
  "mode": "detect-drift",
  "goal_id": "GOAL-20251103T143000",
  "conversation_context": [
    "User: Add OAuth social login",
    "User: Also need password reset",
    "User: What about 2FA?"
  ]
}

Goal Context:

• Original milestones: 3 (Auth, Payments, Catalog)
• New features detected: 3 (OAuth, password reset, 2FA)

Process:

1. Extract: ["OAuth social login", "password reset", "2FA"]
2. Check against milestones: None in original goal
3. Calculate: 3 new / 3 original = 100% expansion
4. Threshold: 100% > 50% → HIGH drift

Output:

{
  "drift_detected": true,
  "expansion_ratio": 100,
  "threshold": "HIGH",
  "new_features": ["OAuth social login", "password reset", "2FA"],
  "alert": "⚠️ Scope expanded by 100% (3 new features)",
  "recommendation": "UPDATE_GOAL",
  "action": "Add Advanced Auth milestone (20% weight)"
}

Example 4: Qualitative Quantification

Input:

{
  "mode": "quantify",
  "goal_text": "Make the platform more performant",
  "domain": "web-application"
}

Process:

1. Detect: "performant" (qualitative)
2. Map to metrics: response time, throughput
3. Prompt user:

   Quantify "performant":
   - Current response time: 500ms (p95)
   - Target response time: ____ ms?
   
   OR:
   - Throughput: ____ requests/second?
   

4. User provides: "100ms p95, 10K req/s"
5. Store quantified goal

Output:

{
  "original_goal": "Make the platform more performant",
  "quantified_goal": "Achieve p95 response time < 100ms with 10K req/s throughput",
  "metrics": [
    {
      "term": "performant",
      "metric": "p95_latency",
      "target": 100,
      "unit": "ms",
      "test_method": "Load testing"
    },
    {
      "term": "performant",
      "metric": "throughput",
      "target": 10000,
      "unit": "req/s",
      "test_method": "Performance profiling"
    }
  ],
  "success_criteria": "Load tests pass with p95 < 100ms at 10K req/s"
}

Validation

How to verify this skill worked correctly:

1. Alignment Score Calculated: Verify 0-100% score present in output
2. Deliverable Mapping: Verify each deliverable has similarity score to milestone
3. Threshold Applied: Verify recommendation (continue/adjust/halt) matches score
4. Drift Detected: Verify scope expansion alerts trigger at 20%+ threshold
5. Quantification Enforced: Verify qualitative goals converted to measurable criteria

Progressive Disclosure

In SKILL.md (this file):

• Core alignment workflows (~1000 lines)
• Scoring algorithm
• Anti-rationalization patterns
• Essential examples (validate, verify, detect-drift, quantify)

In references/ (for deep details):

• references/ALIGNMENT_ALGORITHM.md: Complete similarity calculation details
• references/DRIFT_PATTERNS.md: Advanced drift detection patterns
• references/QUANTIFICATION_MAPPINGS.md: Qualitative→quantitative term mappings

References

• Core Documentation: shannon-plugin/core/PHASE_PLANNING.md
• Related Skills: @goal-management (REQUIRED), @wave-orchestration
• MCP Setup: N/A (uses Serena MCP via goal-management)
• Commands: /shannon:wave (validates pre-wave), /shannon:north_star (validates goal changes)

Skill Type: QUANTITATIVE - Follow alignment scoring algorithm exactly, no subjective adjustments Version: 4.0.0 Last Updated: 2025-11-04 Status: Core