What this prompt does
This prompt builds a product roadmap prioritization framework so feature decisions run on a scoring model rather than whoever lobbies loudest. You provide [product_name], [product_description], your [feature_backlog_size], where requests come from ([input_sources]), and your [engineering_capacity] per quarter. ChatGPT then designs a scoring system, a customer-weighting matrix, a dependency analysis, a capacity plan, stakeholder communication templates, and re-prioritization triggers.
The variables make the framework match how you actually work. [framework_name] picks the methodology (RICE by default), [scoring_dimensions] sets how many axes each feature is scored on, and [enterprise_weight] controls how much more an enterprise request counts than an SMB one. [quarter_count] defines the planning horizon and [debt_percentage] reserves capacity for technical debt so the plan stays realistic. Because it asks for a 1-5 rubric with clear definitions per score, the model returns a scoring guide a whole team can apply consistently, not just a one-off ranking.
When to use it
- Your backlog has grown past what you can reason about by gut and you need an objective scoring model.
- Loud customer requests keep drowning out high-leverage platform work and you want demand weighted against effort.
- You are doing quarterly planning and need to map prioritized features against real engineering capacity.
- You want a dependency analysis that surfaces prerequisite features and bundling opportunities.
- You need different roadmap views for executives, engineers, customers, and sales from one source.
- You want a documented trigger framework for when to re-open the roadmap mid-quarter.
Example output
The response is a framework, not a ranked list of your features. You get a scoring model built on your chosen [framework_name] with weighted dimensions and a 1-5 rubric, a customer-segmentation matrix with the [enterprise_weight] multiplier justified, a dependency-graph analysis approach, a capacity-planning template spread across [quarter_count] quarters that reserves [debt_percentage] for tech debt, four tailored stakeholder communication templates (executive summary, engineering plan, public Now/Next/Later roadmap, and sales enablement), and a re-prioritization trigger list. You then apply the rubric to your own backlog.
Pro tips
- Match
[framework_name]to your team's familiarity — RICE is a safe default, but swap it if your org already speaks a different prioritization language. - Set
[engineering_capacity]in the unit your team estimates in (story points or dev-weeks) so the capacity plan is directly usable. - Justify
[enterprise_weight]against real revenue contribution; an arbitrary multiplier biases the whole scoring model toward big accounts. - Keep
[debt_percentage]honest — under-reserving for tech debt produces a plan that looks great and then slips every quarter. - The model scores the framework, not your actual features, so budget time to apply the rubric to your real backlog afterward.
- Re-run with a different
[quarter_count]when you need a near-term sprint view versus an annual strategic horizon.
