technical-feasibility-study

A structured assessment of whether a proposed technical solution is viable before engineering work begins. It considers the technology, team, timeline, budget, operations, and other constraints, then gives a go-or-no-go recommendation.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to evaluate proposed systems, technologies, or architectures before committing to design or implementation.
Why use it?
It helps avoid spending substantial resources on an approach that cannot be built or operated under the current conditions.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/fattain-naime/engineering-docs/technical-feasibility-study
Any agent
npx skills add fattain-naime/engineering-docs --skill technical-feasibility-study
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fattain-naime/engineering-docs

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 46 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,556 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00046 $0.02556
Opus 5 $0.00023 $0.01278
Sonnet 5 $0.00009 $0.00511
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00256

Measured 2d ago against content hash ac955bbb3828, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

technical-feasibility-study scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/technical-feasibility-study/SKILL.md · 204 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 204 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Purpose

Prevent the most expensive engineering failure mode: committing significant resources to a direction that was never viable. A technical feasibility study is not a design document - it does not specify how to build something. It answers the prior question: should we build it this way at all?

Input

Works best with: A description of the proposed concept, approach, or technology being evaluated. Also valuable: Timeline constraints, team skills inventory, existing tech stack, budget limits, regulatory environment.

Example invocation: Assess the feasibility of building a real-time fraud detection engine using stream processing for our payment gateway, given our team of 3 PHP engineers and a 4-month delivery window.

Key Concepts

Four Feasibility Dimensions

1. Technical Feasibility Can this be built with available or acquirable technology? Does the proposed solution have proven precedent at similar scale? Are there known technical blockers?

2. Resource Feasibility Do we have - or can we acquire - the engineering skills, infrastructure, and budget required? What is the realistic timeline given current team capacity?

3. Operational Feasibility Once built, can we operate, monitor, and maintain this system? Does it integrate with existing monitoring, deployment, and support processes?

4. Risk Feasibility What are the critical failure modes? What is the fallback if this approach does not work? What is the blast radius of a failed implementation?

Recommendation Levels

  • Go: Proceed with design and implementation. Evidence strongly supports viability.
  • Conditional Go: Proceed only if stated conditions are met (e.g., hire specialist, resolve dependency X first).
  • No Go: The approach is not viable under current constraints. Evidence-backed alternative recommended.

What This Is NOT

  • Not a design document. Do not specify implementation details here.
  • Not a business case. Business ROI is a separate concern; focus only on technical viability.
  • Not a decision made by one person. The output should be reviewed by all stakeholders before committing.

Read the full file on GitHub · 204 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 204 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A ac955bbb3828

Subscribe to this mod's changes

technical-feasibility-study is a skill published in the GitHub repository fattain-naime/engineering-docs (4 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 2,556 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

systematic-debugging

Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.

obra/superpowers · 21 tokens

brainstorming

You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.

obra/superpowers · 37 tokens

auto-perf-optimize

Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.

microsoft/vscode · 62 tokens

chat-perf

Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.

microsoft/vscode · 51 tokens

chat-pet-sprite-creation

Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.

microsoft/vscode · 53 tokens

cpu-profile-analysis

Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…

microsoft/vscode · 71 tokens