Phase 1: Understand the Task
Read the task description from the argument. If the description is too vague to estimate meaningfully, ask for clarification before proceeding.
Read CLAUDE.md for project context: tech stack, coding standards, architectural patterns, and any estimation guidelines.
Read relevant design documents from design/gdd/ if the task relates to a documented feature or system.
Phase 2: Scan Affected Code
Identify files and modules that would need to change:
- Assess complexity (size, dependency count, cyclomatic complexity)
- Identify integration points with other systems
- Check for existing test coverage in the affected areas
- Read past sprint data from
production/sprints/for similar completed tasks and historical velocity
Phase 3: Analyze Complexity Factors
Code Complexity:
- Lines of code in affected files
- Number of dependencies and coupling level
- Whether this touches core/engine code vs leaf/feature code
- Whether existing patterns can be followed or new patterns are needed
Scope:
- Number of systems touched
- New code vs modification of existing code
- Amount of new test coverage required
- Data migration or configuration changes needed
Risk:
- New technology or unfamiliar libraries
- Unclear or ambiguous requirements
- Dependencies on unfinished work
- Cross-system integration complexity
- Performance sensitivity
Phase 4: Generate the Estimate
## Task Estimate: [Task Name]
Generated: [Date]
### Task Description
[Restate the task clearly in 1-2 sentences]
### Complexity Assessment
| Factor | Assessment | Notes |
|--------|-----------|-------|
| Systems affected | [List] | [Core, gameplay, UI, etc.] |
| Files likely modified | [Count] | [Key files listed below] |
| New code vs modification | [Ratio] | |
| Integration points | [Count] | [Which systems interact] |
| Test coverage needed | [Low / Medium / High] | |
| Existing patterns available | [Yes / Partial / No] | |
**Key files likely affected:**
- `[path/to/file1]` -- [what changes here]
### Effort Estimate
| Scenario | Days | Assumption |
|----------|------|------------|
| Optimistic | [X] | Everything goes right, no surprises |
| Expected | [Y] | Normal pace, minor issues, one round of review |
| Pessimistic | [Z] | Significant unknowns surface, blocked for a day |
**Recommended budget: [Y days]**
### Confidence: [High / Medium / Low]
[Explain which factors drive the confidence level for this specific task.]
### Risk Factors
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|--------|------------|
### Dependencies
| Dependency | Status | Impact if Delayed |
|-----------|--------|-------------------|
### Suggested Breakdown
| # | Sub-task | Estimate | Notes |
|---|----------|----------|-------|
| 1 | [Research / spike] | [X days] | |
| 2 | [Core implementation] | [X days] | |
| 3 | [Testing and validation] | [X days] | |
| | **Total** | **[Y days]** | |
### Notes and Assumptions
- [Key assumption that affects the estimate]
- [Any caveats about scope boundaries]Output the estimate with a brief summary: recommended budget, confidence level, and the single biggest risk factor.
This skill is read-only — no files are written. Verdict: COMPLETE — estimate generated.
Phase 5: Next Steps
- If confidence is Low: recommend a time-boxed spike (
/prototype) before committing. - If the task is > 10 days: recommend breaking it into smaller stories via
/create-stories. - To schedule the task: run
/sprint-plan updateto add it to the next sprint.
Guidelines
- Always give a range (optimistic / expected / pessimistic), never a single number
- The recommended budget should be the expected estimate, not the optimistic one
- Round to half-day increments — estimating in hours implies false precision for tasks longer than a day
- Do not pad estimates silently — call out risk explicitly so the team can decide