# Product Owner > Use when running daily standups, prioritizing work, tracking cross-project dependencies, or managing development flow. Synthesizes GitHub state with AI-powered analysis, DORA metrics, and WSJF prioritization. Say "/standup", "what should I work on?", or "show project status". - Skill: `tomevault-io/product-owner-2` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/product-owner-2` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/product-owner-2/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/product-owner-2 --- # Product Owner Skill A Claude-native product owner that provides daily standups, priority recommendations, and cross-project awareness without artificial sprint boundaries. Enhanced with AI-powered analysis, metrics tracking, and intelligent dependency detection. ## Contextd Integration (Optional) If contextd MCP is available: - `memory_record` for standup patterns, blockers, and prioritization decisions - Cross-session priority tracking with decision accuracy measurement - `memory_search` to find past standup context and recurring patterns - `remediation_search` for known blockers and their resolutions If contextd is NOT available: - GitHub queries work normally - No cross-session memory (stateless standups) - No decision tracking or pattern learning ## Philosophy - **Recommend, don't dictate**: Present priorities; user decides what to act on - **Continuous flow**: No sprints or ceremonies - priorities adjust daily - **Cross-project awareness**: Dependencies across repos get flagged and prioritized - **Memory persistence**: Use contextd if available (optional) - **Data-driven decisions**: Leverage DORA metrics and WSJF for objective prioritization - **Learn from history**: Track decision accuracy to improve recommendations over time ## When to Use | Trigger | Use Case | |---------|----------| | `/standup` | Daily standup report with AI-generated blockers | | `/standup --metrics` | Include DORA metrics and velocity | | `/standup --platform` | Cross-project view with dependency map | | "what should I work on?" | WSJF-ranked priority recommendations | | "project status" | Current state with risk scoring | | "what's blocking?" | AI-powered blocker analysis | | "show velocity" | Velocity tracking and forecasting | | "show metrics" | DORA metrics dashboard | ## Data Sources ### GitHub (via MCP) | Query | Purpose | |-------|---------| | `list_pull_requests` | Open PRs, review states, ages | | `list_issues` | Priority-labeled issues | | `list_commits` | Recent activity on main | | `list_branches` | Detect stale branches | | `get_commit` | Deployment tracking for DORA | | `search_issues` | Cross-repo dependency detection | ### GitHub Projects v2 (via GraphQL) | Query | Purpose | |-------|---------| | Project items | Sprint/iteration tracking | | Custom fields | Story points, priority, status | | Project views | Board and table layouts | **GraphQL Example:** ```graphql query { organization(login: "fyrsmithlabs") { projectV2(number: 1) { items(first: 100) { nodes { content { ... on Issue { title number } } fieldValues(first: 10) { nodes { ... on ProjectV2ItemFieldNumberValue { number } } } } } } } } ``` ### contextd (Cross-Session Memory) | Query | Purpose | |-------|---------| | `checkpoint_list/resume` | Yesterday's state | | `memory_search` | Recurring patterns, blockers | | `remediation_search` | Known issues and fixes | | `memory_record` | Store prioritization decisions | --- ## AI-Powered Analysis ### Risk Scoring Calculate risk score (0-100) based on technical complexity and business impact: ``` Risk Score = (Technical Complexity * 0.4) + (Business Impact * 0.4) + (Time Sensitivity * 0.2) Technical Complexity factors: - Lines changed: >500 = HIGH, >100 = MEDIUM, else LOW - Files touched: >10 = HIGH, >3 = MEDIUM, else LOW - Cross-service changes: +20 points - Database migrations: +25 points - Security-sensitive areas: +30 points Business Impact factors: - Label priority:critical = 40, priority:high = 30, else 10 - Customer-facing: +20 points - Revenue-impacting: +25 points - Compliance-related: +30 points Time Sensitivity factors: - Days until deadline (if any) - External dependencies timing - Release train alignment ``` **Risk Categories:** | Score | Category | Action | |-------|----------|--------| | 80-100 | CRITICAL | Immediate attention, may need escalation | | 60-79 | HIGH | Prioritize this session | | 40-59 | MEDIUM | Schedule within week | | 0-39 | LOW | Normal queue | ### Semantic Dependency Detection AI analyzes issue/PR content for implicit dependencies beyond explicit references: **Patterns detected:** - Shared code paths (same files modified) - Common data models or schemas - API contract dependencies - Feature flag interdependencies - Deployment order requirements **Example detection:** ``` Issue #45: "Add user avatar upload" Issue #52: "Implement image resizing service" -> DETECTED: #45 likely depends on #52 (image processing capability) ``` ### Automated Blocker Identification Scan issue comments and PR reviews for blocker signals: **Signal patterns:** ```regex # Explicit blockers blocked by|waiting on|depends on|can't proceed # Implicit blockers (in comments) need.*first|requires.*before|after.*merged stuck on|no progress|help needed # Review blockers changes requested.*\d+ days ago approved but.*merge conflict CI.*failing.*\d+ hours ``` **AI Comment Analysis:** ``` PR #42 Comments Analysis: - @alice (2 days ago): "This needs the auth refactor first" - @bob (1 day ago): "Still waiting on API spec" -> BLOCKERS DETECTED: Auth refactor, API spec finalization ``` --- ## WSJF Prioritization Weighted Shortest Job First for objective prioritization: ``` WSJF Score = Cost of Delay / Job Size Cost of Delay = User Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction Where: - User Value: Business impact (1-10) - Time Criticality: Urgency decay (1-10) - Risk Reduction: Technical/business risk mitigated (1-10) - Job Size: Estimated effort in story points or T-shirt sizes ``` ### WSJF Calculation Example ``` Issue: Implement OAuth2 login User Value: 8 (high user demand) Time Criticality: 6 (competitor launching similar) Risk Reduction: 7 (security improvement) Job Size: 5 (medium complexity) WSJF = (8 + 6 + 7) / 5 = 4.2 Issue: Fix typo in docs User Value: 2 (minor inconvenience) Time Criticality: 1 (no deadline) Risk Reduction: 1 (no risk) Job Size: 1 (trivial) WSJF = (2 + 1 + 1) / 1 = 4.0 Result: OAuth2 login prioritized higher despite larger size ``` ### Auto-WSJF from Labels Map GitHub labels to WSJF components: | Label | Component | Value | |-------|-----------|-------| | `priority:critical` | Time Criticality | 10 | | `priority:high` | Time Criticality | 7 | | `security` | Risk Reduction | 9 | | `customer-facing` | User Value | 8 | | `tech-debt` | Risk Reduction | 5 | | `size:XL` | Job Size | 13 | | `size:L` | Job Size | 8 | | `size:M` | Job Size | 5 | | `size:S` | Job Size | 3 | | `size:XS` | Job Size | 1 | --- ## DORA Metrics Integration Track and display key DevOps Research and Assessment metrics: ### Metrics Definitions | Metric | Definition | Calculation | |--------|------------|-------------| | **Deployment Frequency** | How often code deploys to production | Deploys per day/week | | **Lead Time for Changes** | Time from commit to production | PR open -> merge -> deploy | | **Mean Time to Recovery** | Time to restore service after incident | Incident open -> resolved | | **Change Failure Rate** | % of deployments causing failures | Failed deploys / total deploys | ### Data Collection **Deployment Frequency:** ``` # Count merges to main/production in time period mcp__MCP_DOCKER__list_commits( owner: "", repo: "", sha: "main", since: "" ) ``` **Lead Time for Changes:** ``` # For each merged PR: Lead Time = PR merged_at - first_commit_at + deploy_delay ``` **Change Failure Rate:** ``` # Track labels/issues indicating failures mcp__MCP_DOCKER__list_issues( labels: "incident,hotfix,rollback" ) ``` ### Metrics Display Format ``` +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | DORA Metrics: (Last 30 days) | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Deployment Frequency: 2.3/day ########-- Elite | | Lead Time for Changes: 4.2 hrs #######--- High | | Mean Time to Recovery: 1.1 hrs ########-- Elite | | Change Failure Rate: 8% #######--- High | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Trend: ^ Improving (vs last 30 days) | | Team Performance: HIGH PERFORMER | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ ``` ### Performance Benchmarks | Metric | Elite | High | Medium | Low | |--------|-------|------|--------|-----| | Deploy Frequency | Multiple/day | Daily-Weekly | Weekly-Monthly | Monthly+ | | Lead Time | <1 hour | <1 day | <1 week | >1 week | | MTTR | <1 hour | <1 day | <1 week | >1 week | | Change Failure Rate | <5% | 5-10% | 10-15% | >15% | --- ## Velocity Tracking ### Velocity Calculation ``` Velocity = Story Points Completed / Time Period Rolling Average (recommended): velocity_avg = (v_current * 0.4) + (v_prev1 * 0.3) + (v_prev2 * 0.2) + (v_prev3 * 0.1) ``` ### Velocity Sources **From GitHub:** - Closed issues with size labels - Merged PRs with story points - GitHub Projects v2 custom fields **From contextd:** - Historical velocity records - Pattern trends over time ### Forecasting ``` Remaining Work = Sum of story points in backlog Predicted Completion = Remaining Work / Velocity Average Example: Backlog: 45 story points Velocity: 15 points/week Forecast: 3 weeks to completion With 80% confidence interval: Best case: 2.4 weeks (velocity + 25%) Worst case: 4.5 weeks (velocity - 33%) ``` ### Velocity Display ``` Velocity Trend (Last 4 Weeks): Week -3: ########---- 12 pts Week -2: ##########-- 15 pts Week -1: #######----- 11 pts Current: #########--- 14 pts Average: 13 pts/week Trend: Stable (+/-15%) Backlog: 52 pts remaining Forecast: 4 weeks (3-5 week range) ``` --- ## Cross-Project Intelligence ### Dependency Mapping Automatically map dependencies across repositories: ``` Dependency Graph: fyrsmithlabs +------------------+ +------------------+ | marketplace |---->| contextd | | (v1.6.0) | | (v1.0.0) | +------------------+ +------------------+ | | v v +------------------+ +------------------+ | fs-design | | mcp-server | | (v1.0.0) | | (v0.9.0) | +------------------+ +------------------+ Legend: ---> Runtime dependency ...> Dev dependency !!!> Blocking dependency (needs action) ``` ### Shared Component Impact Analysis Detect when changes affect multiple projects: **Detection triggers:** - Shared library version changes - API contract modifications - Database schema changes - Configuration format changes **Impact report:** ``` SHARED COMPONENT ALERT: contextd MCP types v1.3.0 Affected repositories: - marketplace (uses v1.2.0) - UPDATE NEEDED - claude-code-plugin (uses v1.3.0) - Current - internal-tools (uses v1.1.0) - UPDATE NEEDED Breaking changes in v1.3.0: - memory_record signature changed - New required field: project_id ``` ### Team Capacity Allocation Track and recommend work distribution: ``` Team Capacity Overview: Total: 5 contributors active this week Allocation: marketplace: 3 contributors (60%) contextd: 2 contributors (40%) fs-design: 1 contributor (20%) ^ overlap detected Recommendations: - contextd has 2 HIGH priority items but limited capacity - Consider cross-training for fs-design (single point of failure) ``` --- ## Enhanced Standup Features ### AI-Generated Blockers from Comments Automatically extract blockers from issue/PR discussions: ``` BLOCKER ANALYSIS (AI-Generated): PR #42 - Add OAuth2 login Explicit: None stated Detected from comments: - "Waiting on security review" (@alice, 2 days ago) - "Need API docs updated first" (@bob, 1 day ago) Confidence: HIGH Suggested action: Follow up with security team Issue #38 - Performance regression Explicit: "blocked by #35" Detected from comments: - "Can't reproduce without staging access" (@carol, 3 days ago) Confidence: MEDIUM Suggested action: Provision staging access for @carol ``` ### Automated PR Status Summary Rich PR status with actionable insights: ``` PR STATUS SUMMARY: Ready to Merge (2): #42 OAuth2 login - Approved 2 days ago, CI passing ^ STALE: Consider merging or comment on delay #45 Fix typo - Approved today, CI passing In Review (3): #48 Add metrics dashboard - 1 approval, waiting on @alice Last activity: 4 hours ago #50 Refactor auth module - Changes requested by @bob ^ ACTION NEEDED: Address review comments #51 Update deps - No reviews yet (opened 1 hour ago) Draft (1): #52 WIP: New feature - Draft, 15 commits Last push: 30 minutes ago ``` ### Sprint Burndown Context When using iterations/sprints: ``` Sprint Progress (if applicable): +-----------------------------------------------+ | Sprint: 2026-W05 (Jan 27 - Feb 2) | +-----------------------------------------------+ | Day 2 of 5 | | | | Planned: 34 pts | Completed: 8 pts | | Remaining: 26 pts | | | | Burndown: | | Ideal: ########################## | | Actual: ####---------------------- | | | | Status: BEHIND (ideal: 13.6 pts) | | Risk: HIGH - May not complete sprint goal | | | | Recommendations: | | - Reduce scope: Consider moving #48 to next | | - Focus: Complete #42 today (ready to merge)| +-----------------------------------------------+ ``` --- ## External Integrations ### Slack/Teams Notification Patterns Send standup summaries to team channels: **Slack Webhook Format:** ```json { "channel": "#dev-standup", "username": "Product Owner Bot", "icon_emoji": ":clipboard:", "blocks": [ { "type": "header", "text": { "type": "plain_text", "text": "Daily Standup: marketplace" } }, { "type": "section", "fields": [ {"type": "mrkdwn", "text": "*CRITICAL:* 0"}, {"type": "mrkdwn", "text": "*HIGH:* 2"}, {"type": "mrkdwn", "text": "*PRs Ready:* 2"}, {"type": "mrkdwn", "text": "*Blockers:* 1"} ] }, { "type": "section", "text": { "type": "mrkdwn", "text": "*Top Recommendation:* Merge PR #42 (approved, waiting 2 days)" } } ] } ``` **Teams Adaptive Card:** ```json { "type": "AdaptiveCard", "body": [ { "type": "TextBlock", "size": "Large", "weight": "Bolder", "text": "Daily Standup: marketplace" }, { "type": "ColumnSet", "columns": [ {"type": "Column", "items": [{"type": "TextBlock", "text": "CRITICAL: 0"}]}, {"type": "Column", "items": [{"type": "TextBlock", "text": "HIGH: 2"}]} ] } ] } ``` ### Jira Bridge for Hybrid Teams Map between GitHub Issues and Jira: **Jira Field Mapping:** | GitHub | Jira | |--------|------| | `priority:critical` | Priority: Highest | | `priority:high` | Priority: High | | `size:XL` | Story Points: 13 | | Issue labels | Jira labels | | Milestone | Fix Version | **Sync Pattern:** ``` # Query Jira for linked issues jira_issues = jira.search("project = PROJ AND 'GitHub Issue' is not EMPTY") # Correlate with GitHub for issue in jira_issues: gh_ref = issue.customfield_github gh_issue = github.get_issue(gh_ref) # Sync status if gh_issue.state == "closed" and issue.status != "Done": notify("Jira issue out of sync with GitHub") ``` **Hybrid Standup Report:** ``` Cross-Platform Status: GitHub Issues: 12 open (3 HIGH) Jira Tickets: 8 open (2 HIGH) Synced: 5 issues linked Discrepancies: - PROJ-123 (Jira: In Progress) != #45 (GitHub: Closed) ^ ACTION: Update Jira status ``` --- ## contextd Decision Tracking ### Recording Prioritization Decisions Track why items were prioritized: ``` mcp__contextd__memory_record( project_id: "fyrsmithlabs/marketplace", title: "Prioritization decision: OAuth2 over metrics", content: | Context: Both OAuth2 (#42) and metrics (#48) were HIGH priority Decision: Prioritized OAuth2 first Reasoning: - WSJF: OAuth2 (4.2) > metrics (3.8) - Security benefit from OAuth2 - External deadline for OAuth2 (partner launch) Expected outcome: OAuth2 merged by EOD outcome: "pending", tags: ["standup", "prioritization", "decision"] ) ``` ### Tracking Decision Accuracy Measure prioritization quality over time: ``` mcp__contextd__memory_outcome( memory_id: "", outcome: "success", notes: "OAuth2 merged on time, partner launch successful" ) ``` **Accuracy Report:** ``` Prioritization Accuracy (Last 30 days): Total decisions tracked: 24 Correct predictions: 19 (79%) Patterns: - Security items: 95% accuracy (prioritize well) - Time estimates: 65% accuracy (often underestimate) - Blocker detection: 72% accuracy (improve detection) Recommendations: - Add 20% buffer to time estimates - More aggressive blocker follow-up ``` ### Searching Past Standup Context Find relevant historical context: ``` mcp__contextd__memory_search( query: "OAuth implementation blockers", tags: ["standup", "blocker"], limit: 5 ) Results: 1. "Blocker: OAuth2 waiting on security review" (2 days ago) Resolution: Escalated to security lead, resolved in 4 hours 2. "Blocker: OAuth2 library compatibility" (1 week ago) Resolution: Downgraded to v2.1.0, documented in ADR ``` --- ## Priority Classification ### CRITICAL (Immediate Attention) Items requiring immediate attention. Stop current work if needed. **Criteria:** - Security vulnerabilities (label: `security`, `vulnerability`) - Failing CI on main/production branches - PRs blocked >24h with no activity - Production incidents or outages - Data integrity issues - Risk score >= 80 **Action:** Address before anything else. ### HIGH (Today's Focus) Primary work items for the current session. **Criteria:** - PRs approved and ready to merge - Issues with `priority:high` or `priority:critical` label - Items explicitly marked for today in last checkpoint - Carried over items from previous standup - Time-sensitive deliverables - WSJF score in top quartile - Risk score 60-79 **Action:** Complete these during current session. ### DEPENDENCY ALERT (Cross-Project) Items with cross-repository dependencies. **Detection patterns in issue/PR bodies:** ``` - "blocked by #" - "depends on " - "waiting for " - "upstream: " - References to other fyrsmithlabs repos ``` **Semantic detection:** - Shared file modifications across repos - API contract consumers - Shared library version conflicts **Action:** Flag prominently, include in cross-project view. ### MEDIUM (This Week) Important but not urgent items. **Criteria:** - PRs in active review - Issues with `priority:medium` or no priority label - Planned work mentioned in checkpoints - Technical debt items - Risk score 40-59 **Action:** Work on after HIGH items complete. ### CARRIED OVER (Tracking) Items from previous sessions not yet completed. **Detection:** - Compare current checkpoint to previous - Items mentioned but not closed - Stale branches (>24h without PR) **Action:** Review whether still relevant, re-prioritize or close. ## Standup Report Format ### Standard Report ``` +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Daily Standup: / | | at