feature-investment-advisor 技能 | PlugMCP
跳到正文 Home / Skills / feature-investment-advisor feature-investment-advisor Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment.
Install The skill file stays in the publisher's repository.
Paste the copied command in a terminal. It installs this SKILL.md into that agent.
npx skills add deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills --skill feature-investment-advisor -a cursor -y Copy Download skill skills/feature-investment-advisor/SKILL.md on GitHub P
Product-Manager-Skills Product Management skills framework built on battle-tested methods for Claude Code, Cowork, Codex, and AI agents. D
director-readiness-advisor Guide the PM-to-Director transition across preparing, interviewing, landing, and recalibrating. Use when leadership scope is changing and you need practical coaching. M
market-landscape-scan Map a market's segments, players, substitutes, and whitespace with cited evidence. Use when entering or re-evaluating a market before sizing, positioning, or picking competitors to study. Questions
How do I install feature-investment-advisor? Download skills/feature-investment-advisor/SKILL.md from the publisher, or copy the path and open the repository. PlugMCP lists the skill and does not host the file.
Where does feature-investment-advisor live? The publisher keeps it at https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills.
Which agents can use feature-investment-advisor? Claude, Cursor, and Codex can read a SKILL.md you add from the publisher's repository. SKILL.md 简介 常见问题
Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment.
name: feature-investment-advisor
argument-hint: "[feature to evaluate]"
description: Evaluate feature investments using revenue impact, cost structure, ROI, and strategy. Use when deciding whether a feature deserves investment.
intent: >-
Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math.
type: interactive
best_for:
"Assessing whether a feature should be built now"
"Comparing ROI and strategic value of feature ideas"
"Pressure-testing roadmap requests with financial logic"
scenarios:
plugmcp 把任意工具接入任意智能体。面向非开发者的 MCP 服务器目录；网关承载流量，n8n 承载应用。
PlugMCP, 2026
"Should we build SSO for mid-market customers this quarter?"
"Evaluate whether an AI assistant feature is worth the investment"
"Help me decide if this roadmap request has enough ROI to build"
theme: finance-metrics
estimated_time: "15-25 min"
Purpose Guide product managers through evaluating whether to build a feature based on financial impact analysis. Use this to make data-driven prioritization decisions by assessing revenue connection (direct or indirect), cost structure (dev + COGS + OpEx), ROI calculation, and strategic value—then deliver actionable build/don't build recommendations with supporting math.
This is not a generic prioritization framework—it's a financial lens for feature decisions that complements other prioritization methods (RICE, value vs. effort, user research). Use when financial impact is a key decision factor.
Input Works best with: The feature you're deciding on, in a sentence or two.
Also useful: Revenue connection (direct or indirect), rough cost inputs (dev time, COGS, ongoing OpEx), and the strategic argument being made for it.
Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask.
Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The advisor opens by asking what the feature is and how it's supposed to make or save money.
Example invocation: Should we build SSO/SAML? Enterprise deals keep stalling on it; est. 2 engineer-months plus ongoing support burden.
Key Concepts
The Feature Investment Framework A systematic approach to evaluate features financially:
Revenue Connection — How does this feature impact revenue?
Direct monetization (new tier, add-on, usage charges)
Indirect monetization (retention, conversion, expansion enablement)
Cost Structure — What does it cost to build and run?
Development cost (one-time investment)
COGS impact (ongoing infrastructure, processing)
OpEx impact (ongoing support, maintenance)
ROI Calculation — Is the return worth the investment?
Direct monetization: Revenue impact / Development cost
Retention features: LTV impact across customer base / Development cost
Factor in gross margin, not just revenue
Strategic Value — Non-financial value that might override pure ROI
Competitive moat (prevents churn to competitor)
Platform enabler (unlocks future features)
Market positioning (needed for enterprise deals)
Risk reduction (compliance, security)
Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT)
Not feature scoring alone: Combines financial analysis with strategic judgmentNot revenue-only thinking: Considers margins, costs, and ROI, not just top-line revenueNot ignoring retention: Indirect revenue impact (churn reduction) is equally validNot building without validation: Assumes you've done discovery; this is the financial lens
When to Use This Framework
Prioritizing between features with quantifiable revenue/retention impact
Evaluating expensive features (>1 engineer-month of work)
Making build/buy/partner decisions
Defending feature prioritization to stakeholders or leadership
Choosing between direct monetization (add-on) vs. indirect (retention)
Feature is table stakes (must-have for competitive parity)
Impact is purely qualitative (brand, UX delight without measurable retention effect)
You haven't validated the problem (do discovery first)
Feature is < 1 week of work (just build it)
Facilitation Source of Truth
session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess)
one-question turns with plain-language prompts
progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5)
interruption handling and pause/resume behavior
numbered recommendations at decision points
quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include Other (specify) when useful)
This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.
Application This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions , offering 3-5 enumerated options at decision points.
Step 0: Gather Context "Let's evaluate the financial impact of this feature investment. Please provide:
What's the feature? (1-2 sentences)
Target customer segment (SMB, mid-market, enterprise, all)
Current business context:
Current MRR/ARR (or customer count if pre-revenue)
Current ARPU/ARPA
Current monthly churn rate
Gross margin %
Development cost estimate (team size × time)
Any ongoing COGS or OpEx implications?
You can provide estimates if you don't have exact numbers."
Step 1: Identify Revenue Connection "How does this feature impact revenue? Choose the option that best describes the revenue connection:
Direct monetization (new revenue stream) — We'll charge for this (new pricing tier, paid add-on, usage-based fee)Retention improvement (reduce churn) — Addresses key churn reason; keeps customers from leavingConversion improvement (trial-to-paid) — Helps convert free/trial users to paid customersExpansion enabler (upsell/cross-sell) — Creates upsell path or drives usage-based expansionNo direct revenue impact — Table stakes, platform improvement, or strategic value only Choose a number, or describe a custom revenue connection."
Based on selection, agent adapts:
If 1 (Direct monetization):
"What pricing are you considering?"
"What % of customers do you expect to adopt this?" (conservative, base, optimistic)
Calculate: Potential Monthly Revenue = Customer Base × Adoption Rate × Price
If 2 (Retention improvement):
"What % of churn does this feature address?" (e.g., "30% of churned customers cited this gap")
"What churn reduction do you expect?" (e.g., "5% → 4% monthly churn")
Calculate: LTV Impact = Increase in Customer Lifetime × Customer Base × ARPU × Margin
If 3 (Conversion improvement):
"Current trial-to-paid conversion rate?"
"Expected conversion lift?" (e.g., "20% → 25% conversion")
Calculate: Additional MRR = Trial Users × Conversion Lift × ARPU
If 4 (Expansion enabler):
"What expansion opportunity does this create?" (upsell tier, usage growth, add-on)
"What % of customers will expand?"
Calculate: Expansion MRR = Customer Base × Expansion Rate × ARPU Increase
If 5 (No direct revenue impact):
Skip to strategic value assessment
Step 2: Assess Cost Structure "What's the cost structure for this feature?
Development cost (one-time):
Team size: ___ engineers
Time estimate: ___ weeks/months
Estimated dev cost: $___
COGS impact: $___ /month (hosting, infrastructure, processing)
OpEx impact: $___ /month (support, maintenance)
If no ongoing costs, enter $0."
One-time investment: Development cost
Ongoing monthly cost: COGS + OpEx
Contribution margin impact: (Revenue - COGS) / Revenue
If COGS is >20% of projected revenue: "⚠️ This feature significantly dilutes margins"
If ongoing costs are high relative to revenue: "⚠️ Consider if this is sustainable"
Step 3: Evaluate Constraints and Timing "What constraints or timing considerations apply?
Time-sensitive competitive threat — Competitor launched this; we're losing dealsLimited budget/team capacity — We can only build one major feature this quarterDependencies on other work — Requires platform improvements or other features firstNo major constraints — We have capacity and flexibility Choose a number, or describe your constraints."
If 1 (Competitive threat):
Strategic value increases (churn prevention)
Urgency factor in recommendation
Compare ROI against other features in backlog
Recommend stack ranking
Flag dependency risk
Suggest sequencing
Proceed to recommendations
Step 4: Deliver Recommendations
Revenue impact (from Step 1)
Cost structure (from Step 2)
Constraints (from Step 3)
ROI calculation
Strategic value assessment
Agent offers 3-4 recommendations:
Recommendation Pattern 1: Strong Financial Case
ROI >3:1 (direct monetization) or LTV impact >10:1 (retention/expansion)
Positive contribution margin
No major red flags
"Build now — Strong financial case
[Direct/Indirect revenue impact calculation]
Conservative estimate: $___/month
Optimistic estimate: $___/month
Development: $___
Ongoing COGS/OpEx: $___/month
Net margin impact: ___%
Year 1 ROI: ___:1
Payback period: ___ months
Why this makes sense:
[Specific reasoning based on numbers]
Validate pricing/adoption assumptions with customer research
Build MVP to test core value prop
Monitor [specific metric] to measure impact"
Recommendation Pattern 2: Weak Financial Case, Build Anyway (Strategic)
ROI <2:1 or marginal financial impact
But high strategic value (competitive, platform, compliance)
"Build for strategic reasons (financial case is marginal)
Revenue impact: $___/month (modest)
Development cost: $___
ROI: ___:1 (below 3:1 threshold)
[Competitive moat / Platform enabler / Market requirement]
Prevents churn to competitor X
Required for enterprise segment (30% of pipeline)
Recommendation:
Build, but monitor closely:
Track adoption vs. projections
Measure churn impact (target: reduce churn by ___%)
Re-evaluate after 6 months if adoption is low
Risk:
Opportunity cost—other features may have better ROI"
Recommendation Pattern 3: Don't Build (Poor ROI)
ROI <1:1 (direct monetization) or negative LTV impact
Margin-diluting
No compelling strategic value
"Don't build — Financial case doesn't support investment
Revenue impact: $___/month
Development cost: $___
ROI: ___:1 (below breakeven)
Margin impact: Dilutes gross margin from ___% to ___%
Reduce scope — Can we build a simpler version at 50% cost?Change monetization — Can we charge more or differently?Deprioritize — Focus on higher-ROI features like [alternative] What would need to change:
If adoption rate increases from ___% to ___%, ROI becomes viable
If we can reduce dev cost to $___, payback becomes acceptable"
Recommendation Pattern 4: Build Later / Need More Data
Assumptions are highly uncertain
Revenue impact depends on unvalidated hypotheses
Medium strategic value
"Build later — Validate assumptions first
Adoption rate assumption: ___% (needs validation)
Churn impact: ___% reduction (hypothesis, not proven)
Pricing unknown
Run feature demand survey with 50+ customers
Prototype and test willingness-to-pay
Interview churned customers to confirm this addresses churn reason
If % of customers say they'd pay $
If churn interviews confirm this is top 3 reason, build
Otherwise, deprioritize
Spend 2-4 weeks validating
Re-evaluate with real data"
Step 5: Allow Follow-Up Questions
See the detailed math breakdown
Compare this to another feature
Adjust assumptions (pricing, adoption, cost)
Export recommendation summary
Or, ask any follow-up questions."
Show detailed calculations
Sensitivity analysis (what if adoption is 2x? 0.5x?)
Compare multiple features side-by-side
Export summary for stakeholders
Examples See examples/ folder for sample conversation flows. Mini examples below:
Example 1: Direct Monetization (Time Tracking Add-On) User: "We're considering building time tracking as a paid add-on."
Current: 1,000 customers, $500 ARPU, 80% gross margin
Feature: Time tracking add-on, $10/user/month
Dev cost: $100K (2 engineers × 3 months)
Adoption estimate: 20% of customers
Customers with 10 users/account avg = 1,000 accounts × 10 users = 10,000 users
Adoption: 20% of users = 2,000 users
Revenue: 2,000 × $10 = $20K/month = $240K/year
Margin: $240K × 80% = $192K gross profit/year
ROI: $192K / $100K = 1.92:1 in year 1
Payback: $100K / $20K = 5 months
"Build now — Positive ROI with fast payback
Revenue Impact: $240K/year (conservative 20% adoption)
ROI: 1.92:1 in year 1, 3.8:1 in year 2
Payback: 5 months
Fast payback (5 months) means low risk
80% gross margin on add-on revenue
20% adoption is conservative (test willingness-to-pay)
Survey customers: who would pay $10/user for time tracking?
Build MVP with core time tracking only
Beta with 50 customers before broad launch
Track adoption rate vs. 20% target"
Example 2: Retention Feature (Data Export) User: "We're losing customers because they can't export their data easily. Should we build a comprehensive export feature?"
Current: $2M MRR, 500 customers, $4K ARPA, 5% monthly churn
Feature: Full data export (CSV, API, scheduled exports)
Dev cost: $150K (3 engineers × 2 months)
Churn context: 30% of churned customers cited data export as a reason
Current annual churn: ~46% (5% monthly compounded)
Customers churned annually: 500 × 46% = 230 customers
Customers churned due to export issue: 230 × 30% = 69 customers
MRR lost: 69 × $4K = $276K MRR lost/year = $3.3M ARR
If feature reduces this by 50%:
Churn prevented: 35 customers/year
MRR saved: $140K/year
LTV impact (assuming 24-month lifetime): $140K × 24 = $3.36M
Investment: $150K
LTV saved: $3.36M (conservative 50% reduction)
ROI: $3.36M / $150K = 22.4:1 🚀
"Build immediately — Exceptional ROI on retention
Prevents ~35 customer churns/year
Saves $140K MRR annually
LTV impact: $3.36M over customer lifetime
ROI: 22:1 (exceptional)
Why this is a no-brainer:
30% of churn cites this gap (validated problem)
Even if you only prevent 25% (not 50%), ROI is still 11:1
Retention improvements compound (reduces future churn too)
Interview churned customers to validate export was primary reason
Build core export (CSV, API) first
Measure churn rate change after launch (target: 5% → 4.5%)
Add scheduled exports if adoption is high"
Example 3: Poor ROI Feature (Dark Mode) User: "Users are requesting dark mode. Should we prioritize it?"
Current: $500K MRR, 2,000 customers, $250 ARPA, 3% monthly churn, 75% gross margin
Feature: Full dark mode across product
Dev cost: $80K (2 designers + 2 engineers × 1 month)
Revenue connection: Indirect—may improve retention slightly
Agent asks: "What evidence do you have that dark mode will reduce churn?"
User: "Feature requests from 50 users. No data on churn impact."
50 feature requests out of 2,000 customers = 2.5% of base
No validated churn impact
Dev cost: $80K
Optimistic scenario: Prevents 5 churns/year (2.5% of base)
MRR saved: 5 × $250 = $1,250/month = $15K/year
LTV impact (24-month lifetime): $15K × 24 = $360K
ROI: $360K / $80K = 4.5:1 (looks okay, but based on weak assumptions)
"Build later — Weak evidence for ROI
Revenue impact: $15K/year (optimistic)
Development cost: $80K
ROI: 4.5:1 (assumes dark mode prevents churn)
Only 50 users requested this (2.5% of base)
No evidence dark mode reduces churn
Churn interviews don't mention this as a top reason
Survey churned customers — Is dark mode in top 5 churn reasons?Test demand — Ask trial users: "Would dark mode affect your decision to convert?"Reduce scope — Build basic dark mode (20% cost) as experiment Better features to consider:
If retention is priority: Interview churned customers, find top 3 churn drivers
If revenue is priority: Focus on expansion features (upsell, add-ons)
Decision criteria to build:
If churn interviews show dark mode is top 3 reason → build
If conversion research shows 10%+ impact → build
Otherwise → deprioritize"
Common Pitfalls
Pitfall 1: Confusing Revenue with Profit Symptom: "This feature will generate $1M in revenue!" (ignoring $800K COGS)
Consequence: $1M revenue at 20% margin is worth $200K profit, not $1M. Feature looks great until you factor in costs.
Fix: Always calculate contribution margin. Use Revenue × Margin %, not just revenue.
Pitfall 2: Ignoring Payback Period Symptom: "ROI is 5:1, let's build!" (but payback is 36 months and customers churn at 24 months)
Consequence: You never recover the investment because customers leave before payback.
Fix: Check payback period. Must be shorter than average customer lifetime.
Pitfall 3: Overestimating Adoption Symptom: "100% of customers will use this paid add-on!"
Consequence: Real adoption is 10-20%. Revenue projections are 5-10x too high.
Fix: Use conservative adoption estimates (10-20% for add-ons). Validate with willingness-to-pay research.
Pitfall 4: Building Without Validation Symptom: "We think this will reduce churn" (no customer interviews)
Consequence: You build a feature that doesn't address real churn reasons. Churn stays flat.
Fix: Interview churned customers first. Validate that this feature addresses top 3 churn reasons.
Pitfall 5: Ignoring Opportunity Cost Symptom: "This feature has 2:1 ROI, let's build!" (other features have 10:1 ROI)
Consequence: You build a mediocre feature while better options sit in the backlog.
Fix: Compare ROI across features. Build highest-ROI features first (unless strategic value overrides).
Pitfall 6: Strategic Value as Excuse Symptom: "ROI is terrible but it's strategic!" (no clear strategy)
Consequence: "Strategic" becomes a catch-all for building low-value features.
Fix: Define what "strategic" means (competitive moat, platform enabler, compliance). If it doesn't fit, it's not strategic.
Pitfall 7: Margin Dilution Blindness Symptom: "This feature adds $500K revenue!" (but COGS is $400K)
Consequence: Your gross margin drops from 80% to 60%. Feature destroys unit economics.
Fix: Calculate contribution margin. If margin is <50%, reconsider or charge a premium.
Pitfall 8: Celebrating Vanity Metrics Symptom: "This feature will increase engagement!" (but not revenue or retention)
Consequence: You build features that feel good but don't impact business outcomes.
Fix: Tie features to revenue or retention. Engagement is a leading indicator, not an outcome.
Pitfall 9: Forgetting Time Value of Money Symptom: "This feature pays back in 5 years"
Consequence: $1 in 5 years is worth ~$0.65 today (at 9% discount rate). ROI is overstated.
Fix: For long payback periods (>24 months), use NPV (net present value) to discount future cash flows.
Pitfall 10: Building Features for Loud Minorities Symptom: "50 customers requested this!" (out of 10,000)
Consequence: You optimize for 0.5% of your base while ignoring the other 99.5%.
Fix: Weight feature requests by revenue impact or customer segment. 10 enterprise customers > 100 SMB customers if enterprise is your strategy.
References
Related Skills
saas-revenue-growth-metrics — Revenue, ARPU, churn, NRR metrics used in impact calculationssaas-economics-efficiency-metrics — ROI, payback, contribution margin calculationsfinance-metrics-quickref — Quick lookup for formulas and benchmarksacquisition-channel-advisor — Similar ROI framework for channel decisionsfinance-based-pricing-advisor — Pricing impact analysis for monetization features
External Frameworks
RICE Prioritization — Combines Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort (this skill adds financial lens)Value vs. Effort Matrix — This skill quantifies "value" financiallyJobs-to-be-Done — Understand customer problems before evaluating financial impactOpportunity Solution Tree (Teresa Torres) — Map opportunities before calculating ROI
Provenance
Adapted from research/finance/Finance_For_PMs.Putting_It_Together_Synthesis.md (Decision Framework #1)
Quiz scenarios from research/finance/Finance for Product Managers.md
How do I install feature-investment-advisor? Download skills/feature-investment-advisor/SKILL.md from the publisher, or copy the path and open the repository. PlugMCP lists the skill and does not host the file.
Where does feature-investment-advisor live? The publisher keeps it at https://github.com/deanpeters/Product-Manager-Skills.
Which agents can use feature-investment-advisor? Claude, Cursor, and Codex can read a SKILL.md you add from the publisher's repository.