npx skills add smithery/neurofoo --skill moscow
neurofoo/agent-skills
moscow
MoSCoW prioritization categorizing items as Must have, Should have, Could have, or Won't have. Use for scope definition, feature prioritization, or when everything feels equally important.
Installation
npx skills add neurofoo/agent-skills --skill moscow
Similar popular skills
Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.
Helps users discover and install agent skills when they ask questions like "how do I do X", "fi…
3.3M installsBrowser automation CLI for AI agents. Use when the user needs to interact with websites, includ…
810.4K installsReview UI code for Web Interface Guidelines compliance. Use when asked to "review my UI", "chec…
617.3K installsBuild, deploy, evaluate, optimize, fine-tune, and manage Microsoft Foundry agents, models, and …
576.5K installsPrepare azd-based Azure projects for deployment: generates azure.yaml, infrastructure (Bicep/Te…
568.3K installsAlso in this package
Other skills from neurofoo/agent-skills · top by installs.
npx skills add neurofoo/agent-skills
More details
Agent compatibility
Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.
Also listed on
Alternate registries and mirrors of this skill.
Repository health
main
Package contents
Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.
-
skill md
SKILL.md2,186 B -
docs
SUMMARY.md202 B
History
- First seen on skills.sh
- First recorded snapshot · 92 installs
SKILL.md
MoSCoW Prioritization
Categorize items into Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won't have for clear scope and priorities.
Instructions
Take the list of items provided and sort them into MoSCoW categories. Be rigorous about what's truly a "Must"—if the project/goal can still succeed without it, it's not a Must.
Output Format
Context What are we prioritizing for? What are the constraints (time, budget, capacity)?
Prioritized List
Must Have (Critical)
Without these, the project fails or is pointless
- [Item] — [Why it's a must]
- [Item] — [Why it's a must]
Should Have (Important)
Significantly adds value; painful to omit but project survives
- [Item] — [Value it adds]
- [Item] — [Value it adds]
Could Have (Nice to Have)
Desirable if time permits; low impact if cut
- [Item] — [Why it's optional]
- [Item] — [Why it's optional]
Won't Have (Not This Time)
Explicitly out of scope; may revisit later
- [Item] — [Why it's deferred]
- [Item] — [Why it's deferred]
Effort Distribution
| Category | Items | Est. Effort % |
|---|---|---|
| Must | X | ≤60% |
| Should | X | ~20% |
| Could | X | ~10% |
| Won't | X | 0% (deferred) |
Red Flags
- If Must > 60% of effort: scope may be too large
- If no Won'ts: probably not being honest about constraints
- If everything is Must: priorities haven't been set
Rationale Explain the key trade-offs made and the reasoning behind contentious categorizations.
Next Step What's the first Must item to tackle?
Guidelines
- Ask "If we shipped without this, would we fail?" for each Must
- Challenge "Musts" that are really "someone really wants this"
- Make Won'ts explicit—avoids scope creep later
- Consider dependencies (a Must might require a "hidden" Must)
- Stakeholder alignment is essential—this isn't just your opinion
$ARGUMENTS