tech-debt-prioritizer

仓库: patricio0312rev/skills
安装量: 36
排名: #19220

安装

npx skills add https://github.com/patricio0312rev/skills --skill tech-debt-prioritizer

Tech Debt Prioritizer

Systematically prioritize and pay down technical debt.

Scoring Rubric Impact Score (1-10)

10 - Critical:

Prevents new features Causes frequent prod incidents Blocks multiple teams

7-9 - High:

Significantly slows development Causes occasional incidents Affects one team heavily

4-6 - Medium:

Moderate development friction Rare incidents Workarounds exist

1-3 - Low:

Minor annoyance No incidents Easy workarounds Risk Score (1-10)

10 - Critical:

Security vulnerability Data integrity issues Legal/compliance risk

7-9 - High:

Potential data loss System instability Vendor end-of-life soon

4-6 - Medium:

Performance degradation Occasional failures Deprecated but working

1-3 - Low:

Code quality issues Minor bugs Style inconsistencies Effort Score (1-10)

10 - Herculean:

3+ months Multiple teams High risk changes

7-9 - Large:

1-3 months One team Medium risk

4-6 - Medium:

1-4 weeks 1-2 developers Low risk

1-3 - Small:

Days Single developer Very low risk Priority Formula Priority Score = (Impact * 2 + Risk * 1.5) / Effort

Higher score = Higher priority

Tech Debt Inventory | ID | Title | Impact | Risk | Effort | Score | Owner |

| ------ | ---------------------- | ------ | ---- | ------ | ----- | --------- |

| TD-001 | Legacy auth system | 9 | 10 | 8 | 3.7 | Auth Team |

| TD-002 | No database indexes | 8 | 7 | 3 | 7.8 | Backend |

| TD-003 | Monolithic build | 7 | 4 | 6 | 4.0 | DevOps |

| TD-004 | Duplicate API logic | 6 | 3 | 4 | 4.1 | Backend |

| TD-005 | Outdated dependencies | 5 | 8 | 2 | 9.0 | All Teams |

| TD-006 | Missing error handling | 4 | 6 | 3 | 5.7 | Backend |

| TD-007 | Poor test coverage | 4 | 5 | 7 | 2.3 | All Teams |

| TD-008 | Inconsistent naming | 3 | 2 | 5 | 1.6 | Frontend |

Sorted by Priority Score:

  1. TD-005: Outdated dependencies (9.0)
  2. TD-002: No database indexes (7.8)
  3. TD-006: Missing error handling (5.7)
  4. TD-004: Duplicate API logic (4.1)
  5. TD-003: Monolithic build (4.0) ...

Detailed Assessment Template

TD-002: No Database Indexes

Description

Critical queries lack indexes, causing slow response times and high CPU usage.

Impact (8/10)

  • Search queries take 2-5 seconds (should be <500ms)
  • Database CPU at 85% during peak hours
  • User complaints about slow searches
  • Blocks performance optimization work

Risk (7/10)

  • Database may crash under load
  • Losing customers to slow experience
  • Cannot scale without addressing

Effort (3/10)

  • Identify missing indexes: 2 days
  • Add indexes: 1 day
  • Test performance: 1 day
  • Deploy: 1 day Total: 5 days

ROI Analysis

Cost: 5 developer-days = $5,000 Benefit:

  • 80% faster queries
  • 50% less DB CPU
  • Better user experience
  • Enables scaling

ROI: Very High

Implementation Plan

  1. Run EXPLAIN on slow queries
  2. Identify missing indexes
  3. Add indexes in development
  4. Test query performance
  5. Deploy to production (off-peak)
  6. Monitor impact

Dependencies

  • None (can start immediately)

Owner

Backend Team

Status

Backlog → Prioritized for Q1

Quarterly Paydown Plan

Q1 2024 Tech Debt Paydown

Budget: 20% of engineering time (4 weeks total)

Week 1-2: High Priority

  • TD-005: Update dependencies (2 days)
  • TD-002: Add database indexes (5 days)
  • TD-006: Add error handling (3 days)

Week 3: Medium Priority

  • TD-004: Eliminate duplicate logic (5 days)

Week 4: Quick Wins

  • TD-012: Fix broken tests (2 days)
  • TD-015: Remove dead code (2 days)
  • TD-018: Update README (1 day)

Success Metrics

  • Reduce P1 incidents by 30%
  • Improve deployment confidence
  • Decrease development friction
  • Team morale improvement

Decision Framework When to Pay Down Debt

Pay down NOW if:

Security vulnerability Causing frequent incidents Blocking critical features High impact, low effort

Pay down SOON if:

Slowing development significantly Medium-high risk Reasonable effort

Defer if:

Low impact and low risk Very high effort Better alternatives exist When to Increase Budget Indicators debt budget needs increase:

  • Velocity declining
  • Incident rate increasing
  • Developer satisfaction down
  • Onboarding time increasing
  • "It's too hard to..." complaints

Tech Debt Registry interface TechDebt { id: string; title: string; description: string;

// Scoring impact: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10; risk: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10; effort: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10;

// Metadata owner: string; createdAt: Date; targetQuarter?: string; status: "backlog" | "prioritized" | "in-progress" | "done";

// Context affectedSystems: string[]; relatedDebt: string[];

// Plan implementationPlan?: string; roi?: "low" | "medium" | "high" | "very-high"; }

Quarterly Review Process 1. Collect new debt (Week 1)

  • Team submits tech debt items

  • Engineering leads review and score

  • Prioritize (Week 2)

  • Calculate priority scores

  • Review high-priority items

  • Assign owners

  • Plan quarter (Week 3)

  • Allocate 10-20% capacity

  • Schedule work

  • Set success metrics

  • Review results (End of quarter)

  • Measure impact
  • Adjust process
  • Celebrate wins

Best Practices Track systematically: Don't rely on memory Score objectively: Use rubric consistently Regular reviews: Quarterly minimum Budget time: 10-20% of sprint capacity Quick wins: Include easy items for morale Measure impact: Track improvements Make visible: Dashboard, reports No judgment: Tech debt is normal Output Checklist Tech debt items catalogued Impact/risk/effort scores assigned Priority scores calculated Items ranked by priority Top 10 items detailed Quarterly plan created Budget allocated (% of time) Owners assigned Success metrics defined Review cadence established

← 返回排行榜