Essential session storage is required to sign in. Optional analytics remain off unless you allow them.
For a product of your choice, produce: (1) a backlog of 8-10 candidate items scored with RICE (Reach × Impact × Confidence / Effort — show the table and the math, Effort in the denominator); (2) a Now/Next/Later or theme/outcome-based ROADMAP built from those scores — explicitly framed as intent, NOT dated commitments; (3) for the top item, a PRD-lite with user stories ('As a [user], I want [goal], so that [benefit]'), acceptance criteria, and the SUCCESS METRICS you'd move (a north-star plus input metrics, distinguishing actionable from vanity); and (4) one experiment (hypothesis + control/treatment) you'd run to validate the riskiest assumption. Note what you said NO to and why.
RICE applied correctly (Effort as denominator, all four factors), with a defensible scoring rationale; clear trade-offs / what was deprioritized.
Now/Next/Later or outcome-based; communicated as intent/priority, not a list of dated promises.
Top item has proper user stories + acceptance criteria; a north-star + input metrics chosen, vanity metrics avoided.
A real experiment (hypothesis, control/treatment) targeting the riskiest assumption.
Use this README structure to make the work reviewable.
DevPath fetches a read-only, size-capped snapshot. Submitted code is never executed.
# A prioritized roadmap with RICE & metrics
## Goal
For a product of your choice, produce: (1) a backlog of 8-10 candidate items scored with RICE (Reach × Impact × Confidence / Effort — show the table and the math, Effort in the denominator); (2) a Now/Next/Later or theme/outcome-based ROADMAP built from those scores — explicitly framed as intent, NOT dated commitments; (3) for the top item, a PRD-lite with user stories ('As a [user], I want [goal], so that [benefit]'), acceptance criteria, and the SUCCESS METRICS you'd move (a north-star plus input metrics, distinguishing actionable from vanity); and (4) one experiment (hypothesis + control/treatment) you'd run to validate the riskiest assumption. Note what you said NO to and why.
## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] Prioritization rigor: RICE applied correctly (Effort as denominator, all four factors), with a defensible scoring rationale; clear trade-offs / what was deprioritized.
- [ ] Roadmap framing: Now/Next/Later or outcome-based; communicated as intent/priority, not a list of dated promises.
- [ ] Spec & metrics: Top item has proper user stories + acceptance criteria; a north-star + input metrics chosen, vanity metrics avoided.
- [ ] Validation: A real experiment (hypothesis, control/treatment) targeting the riskiest assumption.
## Verification
- [ ] Document installation and run commands.
- [ ] Record automated checks and their exact commands.
- [ ] Add representative output, screenshots, or a short demo where useful.
- [ ] Confirm failure paths and known constraints.
## Decision log
### Decision title
- Context:
- Choice:
- Alternatives considered:
- Tradeoffs:
## Evidence
- Link each rubric criterion to the file, test, or artifact that demonstrates it.
## Known limitations
- List what is intentionally out of scope and what should be improved next.