skills/sd0xdev/sd0x-dev-flow/feasibility-study

feasibility-study

SKILL.md

Feasibility Study Skill

Trigger

  • Keywords: feasibility, is this possible, can we, should we, explore options, before tech spec

When NOT to Use

  • Already have a tech spec (use /deep-analyze)
  • Need implementation, not analysis (use /codex-implement)
  • Quick question (use /codex-explain or /codex-architect)

Workflow

Decompose → Constraints → Code research → Solutions → Codex discussion → Decision → Report

Phase 1: Requirement Decomposition

Use "5 Why" to uncover essence:

  1. Surface requirement (what user asks for)
  2. Underlying problem (why they need it)
  3. Success criteria (quantifiable acceptance)

Phase 2: Constraint Analysis

Inventory constraints by type (Technical, Business, Resource, Compatibility) with flexibility rating.

Phase 3: Code Research

Research existing codebase:

  • Related modules and reusable logic
  • Existing design patterns
  • Tech debt to work around

Phase 4: Solution Exploration

Brainstorm 2-3+ solutions, each with:

  1. Core idea (one sentence)
  2. Implementation path
  3. Quantified feasibility (see @references/analysis-phases.md)
  4. Cost and trade-offs

Phase 5: In-Depth Codex Discussion

⚠️ Core step — not optional (unless --no-codex) ⚠️

See @references/codex-discussion-guide.md for full rules and examples.

Tool Purpose When
/codex-brainstorm Enumerate all options At start
/codex-architect Evaluate design After proposal forms
mcp__codex__codex-reply Ask details Anytime

Phase 6: Comparative Decision

Side-by-side comparison → recommendation + backup + open questions.

Evaluation Dimensions

Dimension Green Yellow Red
Technical Feasibility Has existing patterns Needs adaptation Major innovation
Effort < 3 person-days 3-10 person-days > 10 person-days
Risk Small scope Some uncertainty Many unknowns
Extensibility Easy to extend Needs refactoring Hard to extend
Maintenance Cost Clean, easy Some complexity Complex

Output

## Feasibility Study: <title>
### Quantitative Comparison
| Criterion | Option A | Option B | Option C |
|-----------|----------|----------|----------|

### Recommendation
<selected option with rationale>

Verification

  • 5 Why decomposition completed
  • Constraints inventoried with flexibility
  • Existing code researched (grep/read)
  • 2-3+ solutions explored with quantified assessment
  • Codex discussion documented (unless --no-codex)
  • Comparison table + recommendation + open questions

References

  • Analysis phases: references/analysis-phases.md
  • Codex discussion: references/codex-discussion-guide.md
  • Output template: references/output-template.md

Relationship with Other Commands

/feasibility-study → /tech-spec → /deep-analyze → /codex-implement

Examples

Input: /feasibility-study "Add user quota management"
Action: 5 Why → constraints → code research → 3 solutions → Codex discussion → recommendation

Input: /feasibility-study "Optimize cache" --context src/service/cache.ts
Action: Read cache code → constraints → solutions → Codex brainstorm → comparison → report
Weekly Installs
1
GitHub Stars
86
First Seen
7 days ago
Installed on
amp1
cline1
opencode1
cursor1
kimi-cli1
codex1