Setup & Installation

Install Nm Imbue Feature Review using the ClawHub CLI or OpenClaw CLI:

clawhub install nm-imbue-feature-review

If the CLI is not installed:

npx clawhub@latest install nm-imbue-feature-review

Or install with OpenClaw CLI:

openclaw skills install nm-imbue-feature-review

View on ClawHub · View on GitHub

What This Skill Does

Nm Imbue Feature Review is a Software Development skill for OpenClaw by athola.

Night Market Skill — ported from claude-night-market/imbue. For the full experience with agents, hooks, and commands, install the Claude Code plugin.

Table of Contents

Verification

Run make test-feature-review to verify scoring logic after changes.

Feature Review

Review implemented features and suggest new ones using evidence-based prioritization. Create GitHub issues for accepted suggestions.

Philosophy

Feature decisions rely on data. Every feature involves tradeoffs that require evaluation. This skill uses hybrid RICE+WSJF scoring with Kano classification to prioritize work and generates actionable GitHub issues for accepted suggestions.

When To Use

  • Roadmap reviews (sprint planning, quarterly reviews).
  • Retrospective evaluations.
  • Planning new development cycles.

When NOT To Use

  • Emergency bug fixes.
  • Simple documentation updates.
  • Active implementation (use scope-guard).

Quick Start

1. Inventory Current Features

Discover and categorize existing features:

/feature-review --inventory

2. Score and Classify

Evaluate features against the prioritization framework:

/feature-review

3. Generate Suggestions

Review gaps and suggest new features:

/feature-review --suggest

4. Research-Enriched Scoring

Use tome plugin to adjust scores with external evidence:

/feature-review --research

5. Upload to GitHub

Create issues for accepted suggestions:

/feature-review --suggest --create-issues

Workflow

Phase 1: Feature Discovery (feature-review:inventory-complete)

Identify features by analyzing:

  1. Code artifacts: Entry points, public APIs, and configuration surfaces.
  2. Documentation: README lists, CHANGELOG entries, and user docs.
  3. Git history: Recent feature commits and branches.

Output: Feature inventory table.

Phase 2: Classification (feature-review:classified)

Classify each feature along two axes:

Axis 1: Proactive vs Reactive

Type Definition Examples
Proactive Anticipates user needs. Suggestions, prefetching.
Reactive Responds to explicit input. Form handling, click actions.

Axis 2: Static vs Dynamic

Type Update Pattern Storage Model
Static Incremental, versioned. File-based, cached.
Dynamic Continuous, streaming. Database, real-time.

See classification-system.md for details.

Phase 3: Scoring (feature-review:scored)

Apply hybrid RICE+WSJF scoring:

Feature Score = Value Score / Cost Score

Value Score = (Reach + Impact + Business Value + Time Criticality) / 4
Cost Score = (Effort + Risk + Complexity) / 3

Adjusted Score = Feature Score * Confidence

Scoring Scale: Fibonacci (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13).

Thresholds:

  • > 2.5: High priority.
  • 1.5 - 2.5: Medium priority.
  • < 1.5: Low priority.

See scoring-framework.md for the framework.

Phase 4: Tradeoff Analysis (feature-review:tradeoffs-analyzed)

Evaluate each feature across quality dimensions:

Dimension Question Scale
Quality Does it deliver correct results? 1-5
Latency Does it meet timing requirements? 1-5
Token Usage Is it context-efficient? 1-5
Resource Usage Is CPU/memory reasonable? 1-5
Redundancy Does it handle failures gracefully? 1-5
Readability Can others understand it? 1-5
Scalability Will it handle 10x load? 1-5
Integration Does it play well with others? 1-5
API Surface Is it backward compatible? 1-5

See tradeoff-dimensions.md for criteria.

Phase 4.5: Research Enrichment (feature-review:research-enriched)

Triggered by: --research flag. Requires tome plugin.

Use tome's multi-source research to adjust scoring factors with external evidence. This phase runs between tradeoff analysis and gap analysis.

  1. Dispatch research: For each feature, construct research topics and dispatch tome channels (code-search, discourse, papers, triz) in parallel.
  2. Synthesize findings: Merge results across channels using tome:synthesize.
  3. Calculate deltas: Map findings to scoring factor adjustments using channel-to-factor mapping.
  4. Apply deltas: Adjust initial scores by research deltas, clamp to Fibonacci scale, respect max_delta.
  5. Present evidence: Show adjustment table with evidence sources and rationale.

See research-enrichment.md for the full enrichment protocol, delta calculation, and graceful degradation behavior.

Graceful degradation: If tome is not installed, prints a warning and proceeds with initial scores unchanged.

Phase 5: Gap Analysis & Suggestions (feature-review:suggestions-generated)

  1. Identify gaps: Missing Kano basics.
  2. Surface opportunities: High-value, low-effort features.
  3. Flag technical debt: Features with declining scores.
  4. Recommend actions: Build, improve, deprecate, or maintain.

Phase 6: GitHub Integration (feature-review:issues-created)

  1. Generate issue title and body from suggestions.
  2. Apply labels (feature, enhancement, priority/*).
  3. Link to related issues.
  4. Confirm with user before creation.

Deferred capture for high-scoring suggestions: After the user confirms which suggestions to act on, any high-scoring suggestion (score > 2.5) that is not acted on should be preserved as a deferred item. Run once per skipped high-scoring suggestion:

python3 scripts/deferred_capture.py \
  --title "<suggestion title>" \
  --source feature-review \
  --context "RICE score: <score>. <description>"

This runs automatically without prompting the user. Suggestions with scores of 2.5 or below do not need to be captured.

Configuration

Feature-review uses opinionated defaults but allows customization.

Configuration File

Create .feature-review.yaml in project root:

# .feature-review.yaml
version: 1

# Scoring weights (must sum to 1.0)
weights:
  value:
    reach: 0.25
    impact: 0.30
    business_value: 0.25
    time_criticality: 0.20
  cost:
    effort: 0.40
    risk: 0.30
    complexity: 0.30

# Score thresholds
thresholds:
  high_priority: 2.5
  medium_priority: 1.5

# Tradeoff dimension weights (0.0 to disable)
tradeoffs:
  quality: 1.0
  latency: 1.0
  token_usage: 1.0
  resource_usage: 0.8
  redundancy: 0.5
  readability: 1.0
  scalability: 0.8
  integration: 1.0
  api_surface: 1.0

See configuration.md for options.

Guardrails

These rules apply to all configurations:

  1. Minimum dimensions: Evaluate at least 5 tradeoff dimensions.
  2. Confidence requirement: Review scores below 50% confidence.
  3. Breaking change warning: Require acknowledgment for API surface changes.
  4. Backlog limit: Limit suggestion queue to 25 items.

Required TodoWrite Items

  1. feature-review:inventory-complete
  2. feature-review:classified
  3. feature-review:scored
  4. feature-review:tradeoffs-analyzed
  5. feature-review:research-enriched (if --research)
  6. feature-review:suggestions-generated
  7. feature-review:issues-created (if requested)

Integration Points

  • imbue:scope-guard: Provides Worthiness Scores for suggestions.
  • sanctum:do-issue: Prioritizes issues with high scores.
  • superpowers:brainstorming: Evaluates new ideas against existing features.
  • tome:research: Multi-source research for score enrichment (optional, --research).

Output Format

Feature Inventory Table

| Feature | Type | Data | Score | Priority | Status |
|---------|------|------|-------|----------|--------|
| Auth middleware | Reactive | Dynamic | 2.8 | High | Stable |
| Skill loader | Reactive | Static | 2.3 | Medium | Needs improvement |

Research-Enriched Table (with --research)

| Feature | Type | Score | Adj. | Priority | Evidence |
|---------|------|-------|------|----------|----------|
| Auth    | R/D  | 2.8   | 3.1  | High     | 3 sources |
| Loader  | R/S  | 2.3   | 2.3  | Medium   | none      |

## Research Evidence

### Code Search (GitHub)
- 12 implementations, avg 340 stars
- **Reach**: +1 (broad adoption)

### Discourse (HN/Reddit)
- 47 mentions, 78% positive
- **Impact**: +1 (strong demand)

Suggestion Report

## Feature Suggestions

### High Priority (Score > 2.5)

1. **[Feature Name]** (Score: 2.7)
   - Classification: Proactive/Dynamic
   - Value: High reach
   - Cost: Moderate effort
   - Recommendation: Build in next sprint

Related Skills

  • imbue:scope-guard: Prevent overengineering.
  • imbue:review-core: Structured review methodology.
  • sanctum:pr-review: Code-level feature review.

Reference

Troubleshooting

Common Issues

Command not found Ensure all dependencies are installed and in PATH

Permission errors Check file permissions and run with appropriate privileges

Unexpected behavior Enable verbose logging with --verbose flag

Version History

Latest version: 1.0.0

First published: Apr 12, 2026. Last updated: Apr 12, 2026.

1 version released.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Nm Imbue Feature Review free to use?
Yes. Nm Imbue Feature Review is a free, open-source skill available on the OpenClaw Skills Registry. You can install and use it at no cost, and the source code is publicly available for review and contribution.
What languages/platforms does Nm Imbue Feature Review support?
It runs on any platform that supports OpenClaw, including macOS, Linux, and Windows. As long as you have the OpenClaw runtime installed, Nm Imbue Feature Review will work seamlessly across operating systems.
How do I update Nm Imbue Feature Review?
Run openclaw skills update nm-imbue-feature-review to get the latest version. OpenClaw will download and apply the update automatically, preserving your existing configuration.
Can I use Nm Imbue Feature Review with other skills?
Yes. OpenClaw skills are composable — you can combine Nm Imbue Feature Review with any other installed skill in your workflows. This allows you to build powerful multi-step automations by chaining skills together.