重要前提
安装AI Skills的关键前提是:必须科学上网,且开启TUN模式,这一点至关重要,直接决定安装能否顺利完成,在此郑重提醒三遍:科学上网,科学上网,科学上网。查看完整安装教程 →
adr-roadmap by vladm3105/aidoc-flow-framework
npx skills add https://github.com/vladm3105/aidoc-flow-framework --skill adr-roadmap分析架构决策记录(ADRs)并为任何项目类型生成分阶段实施路线图,包含时间线、依赖关系、资源分配和风险评估。
核心能力:
project-mngt 技能doc-flow 技能charts-flow 技能广告位招租
在这里展示您的产品或服务
触达数万 AI 开发者,精准高效
| 输入 | 描述 | 示例 |
|---|---|---|
| adr_directory | ADR Markdown 文件的绝对路径 | {project_root}/docs/ADR/ |
| project_context | 项目类型、团队规模、时间线约束 | "交易平台,5 名全职工程师,6 个月时间线" |
| 输入 | 描述 | 默认值 |
|---|---|---|
| output_file | 路线图目标路径 | {adr_directory}/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md |
| max_phase_duration | 每阶段最大周数 | 8 周 |
| prioritize_adr | 强制特定 ADR ID 优先(例如 "ADR-02") | 无 |
| phase_model | 阶段划分方法:poc-mvp-prod、iterative、waterfall | poc-mvp-prod |
| team_size | 全职工程师数量 | 3 |
| target_phases | 期望的阶段数量 | 自动计算 |
操作:
ADR-*.md 文件ADR-00_index.md),如果存在验证:
输出:包含元数据的 ADR 清单
操作:
依赖关系分类:
输出:
操作:
工作量估算公式:
Total Effort = Σ(ADR Complexity × Base Effort) × Risk Buffer
Base Effort (1=1d, 2=2d, 3=4d, 4=10d, 5=20d)
Risk Buffer = 1.2 (20% contingency)
输出:
阶段划分算法:
应用选定的阶段模型:
Phase 1: POC (Proof of Concept)
- Minimal ADRs to validate technical feasibility
- Target: 2-3 weeks
- Criteria: Core integration working end-to-end
Phase 2: MVP (Minimum Viable Product)
- Add multi-user, persistence, basic security
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Production-ready for limited users
Phase 3: Production
- Cloud deployment, full security, monitoring
- Target: 6-8 weeks
- Criteria: Enterprise-grade reliability
Phase 4: Scale & Optimize
- Performance tuning, advanced patterns
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Performance targets met
Phase 5: Advanced Features
- Extended capabilities, continuous improvement
- Target: Ongoing
- Criteria: Feature backlog prioritized
Each iteration (2-4 weeks):
- Select ADR cluster (low dependency)
- Implement and validate
- Integrate with existing system
- Deploy incrementally
Phase by ADR category:
- Infrastructure ADRs
- Core business logic ADRs
- Integration ADRs
- Optimization ADRs
阶段分配规则:
输出:
操作:
根据 ADR 工作量估算计算阶段持续时间:
Phase Duration = (Σ ADR Effort in Phase) / (Team Size × Efficiency Factor) Efficiency Factor = 0.7 (account for meetings, context switching)
添加阶段间缓冲:
创建甘特图(Mermaid 格式):
gantt title ADR Implementation Timeline dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD section Phase 1 POC: p1, 2025-01-15, 3w section Phase 2 MVP: p2, after p1, 6w
识别关键里程碑:
输出:
在 {output_file} 生成全面的路线图:
文档结构:
# ADR Implementation Roadmap
## Document Control
| Item | Details |
|------|---------|
| **Project Name** | [Enter project name] |
| **Document Version** | [e.g., 1.0] |
| **Date** | [Current date] |
| **Document Owner** | [Name and title] |
| **Prepared By** | [Technical Lead/Architect name] |
| **Status** | [Draft / In Review / Approved] |
### Document Revision History
| Version | Date | Author | Changes Made | Approver |
|---------|------|--------|--------------|----------|
| 1.0 | [Date] | [Name] | Initial roadmap | |
| | | | | |
## Executive Summary
- Project overview
- Total ADRs: N
- Total phases: M
- Timeline: X weeks
- Team size: Y FTE
- Key milestones
## Phase 1: [Phase Name]
### Objectives
### Duration
### ADRs to Implement
#### ADR-XXX: Title
- Complexity: N/5
- Effort: X hours
- Scope: What to implement
- Deferred: What to skip
- Acceptance Criteria
### System Architecture
- Mermaid diagram
### Implementation Order
- Week-by-week breakdown
### Deliverables
### Success Criteria
### Risk Assessment
### Exit Criteria
## Phase 2: [Phase Name]
[Same structure]
...
## ADR Dependency Matrix
- Mermaid flowchart
- Critical path highlighted
- Parallel opportunities
## Technical Debt Management
- POC shortcuts (acceptable)
- MVP shortcuts (acceptable)
- Production standards (zero tolerance)
- Debt remediation timeline
## Risk Assessment
- Phase 1 risks
- Phase 2 risks
- Go/no-go thresholds
## Testing Strategy
- Phase 1: Manual testing only
- Phase 2: Automated unit/integration
- Phase 3: Security, performance, compliance
- Phase 4: Load testing, chaos engineering
## Acceptance Criteria
- Phase 1 acceptance
- Phase 2 acceptance
- [Per phase]
## Traceability
- ADR to Phase mapping table
- Phase to Timeline mapping
- Upstream sources (BRD, PRD)
- Downstream artifacts (SYS, REQ, SPEC)
文档格式:
输出:完整的路线图 Markdown 文件
特点:
阶段划分策略:
示例阶段结构:
Phase 1: Foundation (Tech stack, cloud, database)
Phase 2: Core Features (Business logic ADRs)
Phase 3: Integration (External services, APIs)
Phase 4: Polish (Performance, UX, advanced features)
特点:
阶段划分策略:
示例阶段结构:
Phase 1: Infrastructure Prep (Observability, feature flags)
Phase 2: Low-Risk Migration (Read-only endpoints)
Phase 3: Medium-Risk Migration (Write endpoints with rollback)
Phase 4: High-Risk Migration (Core business logic)
Phase 5: Decommission Legacy (Remove old system)
迁移特定部分需添加:
特点:
阶段划分策略:
示例阶段结构:
Phase 1: Test Infrastructure (Add missing tests)
Phase 2: Module A Refactor (Database layer)
Phase 3: Module B Refactor (API layer)
Phase 4: Module C Refactor (Business logic)
Phase 5: Cleanup (Remove deprecated code)
何时创建新阶段?
决策树:
1. Check dependencies:
- New ADRs have no dependencies on current phase? → New phase
- All dependencies in current/prior phases? → Same phase
2. Check complexity threshold:
- Current phase exceeds max_phase_duration (8 weeks)? → New phase
- Under threshold? → Same phase
3. Check risk isolation:
- ADR is high-risk (complexity 4-5)? → Consider separate phase for POC
- Low-medium risk? → Group with similar ADRs
4. Check milestone boundary:
- Natural project milestone (POC, MVP, Beta, GA)? → Phase boundary
- Mid-milestone? → Same phase
输出:阶段边界决策
按以下优先级排序(从高到低):
算法:
def sequence_adrs(adrs_in_phase):
# Step 1: Topological sort by dependencies (must respect)
sorted_by_deps = topological_sort(adrs_in_phase)
# Step 2: Within each dependency level, sort by risk/value
for level in sorted_by_deps:
if phase == "POC":
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.risk, reverse=True) # High-risk first
else:
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.value, reverse=True) # High-value first
return flatten(sorted_by_deps)
输出:每个阶段的有序 ADR 序列
当没有明确的评级时,估算 ADR 复杂性:
估算启发式方法:
Complexity 1 (Trivial):
- Simple configuration change
- Library upgrade (no breaking changes)
- Documentation update
- Effort: 1 day
Complexity 2 (Simple):
- Add logging/monitoring
- Simple API endpoint
- Basic CRUD operation
- Effort: 2 days
Complexity 3 (Moderate):
- New authentication provider
- Database schema change
- Third-party integration
- Effort: 3-5 days
Complexity 4 (Complex):
- New deployment architecture
- Real-time data processing
- Multi-service integration
- Effort: 1-2 weeks
Complexity 5 (Architectural):
- Cloud provider migration
- Event-driven architecture
- Major technology swap
- Effort: 3-4 weeks
输出:每个 ADR 的复杂性评级
各阶段可接受的捷径:
| 阶段 | 可接受的捷径 | 必须拥有 | 修复阶段 |
|---|---|---|---|
| POC | 硬编码凭据、内存数据、打印日志、无测试、本地部署 | 工作集成 | MVP |
| MVP | 基本错误处理、简单缓存、最小监控 | 多用户认证、持久化、单元测试 | 生产 |
| 生产 | 部分优化 | 完整安全性、监控、高可用性、合规性 | 扩展 |
| 扩展 | 部分手动流程 | 性能目标、自动扩缩容 | 高级 |
| 高级 | 无(持续改进) | 所有功能达到生产级 | 不适用 |
输出:技术债务跟踪表
用户调用:
Use the adr-roadmap skill to create implementation roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {project_root}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Interactive Brokers MCP server, 3 developers, POC in 3 weeks
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 3
Generate roadmap in {project_root}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
技能操作:
{project_root}/docs/ADR/ 读取 27 个 ADRs生成输出:ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md(约 1,400 行)
用户调用:
Use adr-roadmap skill for microservices migration roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/
- Project context: Monolith to microservices migration, 8 developers, 9-month timeline
- Phase model: iterative
- Team size: 8
Generate roadmap in {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
技能操作:
生成输出:包含回滚计划的迁移路线图
用户调用:
Create 6-month data platform roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Real-time analytics platform, 10 engineers, 6-month timeline
- Phase model: waterfall
- Team size: 10
- Target phases: 6
Generate roadmap in {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
技能操作:
生成输出:包含 6 个阶段的资源感知路线图
用户调用:
Create roadmap for IoT device firmware.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: /firmware/docs/adr/
- Project context: IoT sensor firmware, 2 embedded engineers, hardware prototype ready
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 2
- Constraints: Hardware prototype available Week 4
Generate roadmap in /firmware/docs/adr/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
技能操作:
生成输出:包含门控阶段的硬件感知路线图
路线图文档必须满足:
缺少 ADR 元数据:
循环依赖:
未找到 ADR:
约束冲突:
文件:{project}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
大小:1,000-2,000 行(根据 ADR 数量变化)
令牌限制:<100,000 令牌
部分(按顺序):
文档标题:
文档控制:
目录:指向所有部分的链接
执行摘要:
阶段定义(每个阶段一个部分):
ADR 依赖关系矩阵:
技术债务管理:
风险评估:
测试策略:
验收标准: * 各阶段的功能需求 * 各阶段的质量属性 * 技术验证
可追溯性: * ADR 到阶段映射表 * 阶段到时间线映射 * 上游来源 * 下游工件
project-mngt 技能:doc-flow 技能:adr-roadmap + charts-flow:adr-roadmap + project-mngt:| 版本 | 日期 | 变更 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.0 | 2025-01-08 | 初始技能创建,包含全面的方法论 |
技能定义结束
每周安装次数
52
仓库
GitHub 星标数
10
首次出现
2026 年 1 月 24 日
安全审计
安装于
gemini-cli45
codex44
claude-code42
github-copilot42
opencode41
cursor40
Analyze Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) and generate phased implementation roadmaps with timelines, dependencies, resource allocation, and risk assessment for any project type.
Key Capabilities :
project-mngt skill insteaddoc-flow skill insteadcharts-flow skill instead| Input | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
| adr_directory | Absolute path to ADR markdown files | {project_root}/docs/ADR/ |
| project_context | Project type, team size, timeline constraints | "Trading platform, 5 FTE, 6-month timeline" |
| Input | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|
| output_file | Roadmap destination path | {adr_directory}/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md |
| max_phase_duration | Maximum weeks per phase | 8 weeks |
| prioritize_adr | Force specific ADR ID first (e.g., "ADR-02") | None |
| phase_model | Phasing approach: poc-mvp-prod, iterative, waterfall | poc-mvp-prod |
Actions :
ADR-*.md files from specified directoryADR-00_index.md) if presentValidation :
Output : ADR inventory with metadata
Actions :
Dependency Classification :
Output :
Actions :
Effort Estimation Formula :
Total Effort = Σ(ADR Complexity × Base Effort) × Risk Buffer
Base Effort (1=1d, 2=2d, 3=4d, 4=10d, 5=20d)
Risk Buffer = 1.2 (20% contingency)
Output :
Phasing Algorithm :
Apply selected phase model:
Phase 1: POC (Proof of Concept)
- Minimal ADRs to validate technical feasibility
- Target: 2-3 weeks
- Criteria: Core integration working end-to-end
Phase 2: MVP (Minimum Viable Product)
- Add multi-user, persistence, basic security
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Production-ready for limited users
Phase 3: Production
- Cloud deployment, full security, monitoring
- Target: 6-8 weeks
- Criteria: Enterprise-grade reliability
Phase 4: Scale & Optimize
- Performance tuning, advanced patterns
- Target: 4-6 weeks
- Criteria: Performance targets met
Phase 5: Advanced Features
- Extended capabilities, continuous improvement
- Target: Ongoing
- Criteria: Feature backlog prioritized
Each iteration (2-4 weeks):
- Select ADR cluster (low dependency)
- Implement and validate
- Integrate with existing system
- Deploy incrementally
Phase by ADR category:
- Infrastructure ADRs
- Core business logic ADRs
- Integration ADRs
- Optimization ADRs
Phase Assignment Rules :
Output :
Actions :
Calculate phase durations from ADR effort estimates:
Phase Duration = (Σ ADR Effort in Phase) / (Team Size × Efficiency Factor) Efficiency Factor = 0.7 (account for meetings, context switching)
Add inter-phase buffers:
Create Gantt chart (Mermaid format):
gantt title ADR Implementation Timeline dateFormat YYYY-MM-DD section Phase 1 POC: p1, 2025-01-15, 3w section Phase 2 MVP: p2, after p1, 6w
Identify critical milestones:
Output :
Generate comprehensive roadmap at {output_file}:
Document Structure :
# ADR Implementation Roadmap
## Document Control
| Item | Details |
|------|---------|
| **Project Name** | [Enter project name] |
| **Document Version** | [e.g., 1.0] |
| **Date** | [Current date] |
| **Document Owner** | [Name and title] |
| **Prepared By** | [Technical Lead/Architect name] |
| **Status** | [Draft / In Review / Approved] |
### Document Revision History
| Version | Date | Author | Changes Made | Approver |
|---------|------|--------|--------------|----------|
| 1.0 | [Date] | [Name] | Initial roadmap | |
| | | | | |
## Executive Summary
- Project overview
- Total ADRs: N
- Total phases: M
- Timeline: X weeks
- Team size: Y FTE
- Key milestones
## Phase 1: [Phase Name]
### Objectives
### Duration
### ADRs to Implement
#### ADR-XXX: Title
- Complexity: N/5
- Effort: X hours
- Scope: What to implement
- Deferred: What to skip
- Acceptance Criteria
### System Architecture
- Mermaid diagram
### Implementation Order
- Week-by-week breakdown
### Deliverables
### Success Criteria
### Risk Assessment
### Exit Criteria
## Phase 2: [Phase Name]
[Same structure]
...
## ADR Dependency Matrix
- Mermaid flowchart
- Critical path highlighted
- Parallel opportunities
## Technical Debt Management
- POC shortcuts (acceptable)
- MVP shortcuts (acceptable)
- Production standards (zero tolerance)
- Debt remediation timeline
## Risk Assessment
- Phase 1 risks
- Phase 2 risks
- Go/no-go thresholds
## Testing Strategy
- Phase 1: Manual testing only
- Phase 2: Automated unit/integration
- Phase 3: Security, performance, compliance
- Phase 4: Load testing, chaos engineering
## Acceptance Criteria
- Phase 1 acceptance
- Phase 2 acceptance
- [Per phase]
## Traceability
- ADR to Phase mapping table
- Phase to Timeline mapping
- Upstream sources (BRD, PRD)
- Downstream artifacts (SYS, REQ, SPEC)
Document Formatting :
Output : Complete roadmap markdown file
Characteristics :
Phasing Strategy :
Example Phase Structure :
Phase 1: Foundation (Tech stack, cloud, database)
Phase 2: Core Features (Business logic ADRs)
Phase 3: Integration (External services, APIs)
Phase 4: Polish (Performance, UX, advanced features)
Characteristics :
Phasing Strategy :
Example Phase Structure :
Phase 1: Infrastructure Prep (Observability, feature flags)
Phase 2: Low-Risk Migration (Read-only endpoints)
Phase 3: Medium-Risk Migration (Write endpoints with rollback)
Phase 4: High-Risk Migration (Core business logic)
Phase 5: Decommission Legacy (Remove old system)
Migration-Specific Sections to Add :
Characteristics :
Phasing Strategy :
Example Phase Structure :
Phase 1: Test Infrastructure (Add missing tests)
Phase 2: Module A Refactor (Database layer)
Phase 3: Module B Refactor (API layer)
Phase 4: Module C Refactor (Business logic)
Phase 5: Cleanup (Remove deprecated code)
When to create a new phase?
Decision tree:
1. Check dependencies:
- New ADRs have no dependencies on current phase? → New phase
- All dependencies in current/prior phases? → Same phase
2. Check complexity threshold:
- Current phase exceeds max_phase_duration (8 weeks)? → New phase
- Under threshold? → Same phase
3. Check risk isolation:
- ADR is high-risk (complexity 4-5)? → Consider separate phase for POC
- Low-medium risk? → Group with similar ADRs
4. Check milestone boundary:
- Natural project milestone (POC, MVP, Beta, GA)? → Phase boundary
- Mid-milestone? → Same phase
Output : Phase boundary decision
Order ADRs by :
Priority ranking (highest to lowest):
Algorithm :
def sequence_adrs(adrs_in_phase):
# Step 1: Topological sort by dependencies (must respect)
sorted_by_deps = topological_sort(adrs_in_phase)
# Step 2: Within each dependency level, sort by risk/value
for level in sorted_by_deps:
if phase == "POC":
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.risk, reverse=True) # High-risk first
else:
level.sort(key=lambda adr: adr.value, reverse=True) # High-value first
return flatten(sorted_by_deps)
Output : Ordered ADR sequence per phase
Aggregate ADR complexity when explicit ratings not available:
Estimation heuristics:
Complexity 1 (Trivial):
- Simple configuration change
- Library upgrade (no breaking changes)
- Documentation update
- Effort: 1 day
Complexity 2 (Simple):
- Add logging/monitoring
- Simple API endpoint
- Basic CRUD operation
- Effort: 2 days
Complexity 3 (Moderate):
- New authentication provider
- Database schema change
- Third-party integration
- Effort: 3-5 days
Complexity 4 (Complex):
- New deployment architecture
- Real-time data processing
- Multi-service integration
- Effort: 1-2 weeks
Complexity 5 (Architectural):
- Cloud provider migration
- Event-driven architecture
- Major technology swap
- Effort: 3-4 weeks
Output : Complexity rating per ADR
Acceptable shortcuts per phase :
| Phase | Acceptable Shortcuts | Must Have | Remediation Phase |
|---|---|---|---|
| POC | Hardcoded credentials, in-memory data, print logging, no tests, local deployment | Working integration | MVP |
| MVP | Basic error handling, simple caching, minimal monitoring | Multi-user auth, persistence, unit tests | Production |
| Production | Partial optimization | Full security, monitoring, HA, compliance | Scale |
| Scale | Some manual processes | Performance targets, auto-scaling | Advanced |
| Advanced | None (continuous improvement) | All features production-grade | N/A |
Output : Technical debt tracking table
User Invocation :
Use the adr-roadmap skill to create implementation roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {project_root}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Interactive Brokers MCP server, 3 developers, POC in 3 weeks
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 3
Generate roadmap in {project_root}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions :
{project_root}/docs/ADR/Generated Output : ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md (~1,400 lines)
User Invocation :
Use adr-roadmap skill for microservices migration roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/
- Project context: Monolith to microservices migration, 8 developers, 9-month timeline
- Phase model: iterative
- Team size: 8
Generate roadmap in {example_project_a}/architecture/decisions/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions :
Generated Output : Migration roadmap with rollback plans
User Invocation :
Create 6-month data platform roadmap.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/
- Project context: Real-time analytics platform, 10 engineers, 6-month timeline
- Phase model: waterfall
- Team size: 10
- Target phases: 6
Generate roadmap in {example_project_b}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions :
Generated Output : Resource-aware roadmap with 6 phases
User Invocation :
Create roadmap for IoT device firmware.
Inputs:
- ADR directory: /firmware/docs/adr/
- Project context: IoT sensor firmware, 2 embedded engineers, hardware prototype ready
- Phase model: poc-mvp-prod
- Team size: 2
- Constraints: Hardware prototype available Week 4
Generate roadmap in /firmware/docs/adr/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Skill Actions :
Generated Output : Hardware-aware roadmap with gated phases
Roadmap document must satisfy:
Missing ADR metadata :
Circular dependencies :
Zero ADRs found :
Conflicting constraints :
File : {project}/docs/ADR/ADR-00_IMPLEMENTATION-ROADMAP.md
Size : 1,000-2,000 lines (varies by ADR count)
Token Limit : <100,000 tokens
Sections (in order):
Document Header :
Document Control :
Table of Contents : Links to all sections
Executive Summary :
Phase Definitions (1 section per phase):
ADR Dependency Matrix :
Technical Debt Management :
* Functional requirements per phase
* Quality attributes per phase
* Technical validation
11. Traceability :
* ADR to Phase mapping table
* Phase to Timeline mapping
* Upstream sources
* Downstream artifacts
project-mngt Skill Instead When:doc-flow Skill Instead When:adr-roadmap + charts-flow When:adr-roadmap + project-mngt When:| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| 1.0.0 | 2025-01-08 | Initial skill creation with comprehensive methodology |
End of Skill Definition
Weekly Installs
52
Repository
GitHub Stars
10
First Seen
Jan 24, 2026
Security Audits
Gen Agent Trust HubPassSocketPassSnykPass
Installed on
gemini-cli45
codex44
claude-code42
github-copilot42
opencode41
cursor40
开源项目教练指南 - 诊断问题、制定行动计划、优化开源项目运营
50,600 周安装
React组件AI渲染教程:使用add-components-to-registry将组件转换为Tambo注册组件
106 周安装
技术设计文档生成器 | 结构化系统设计文档模板与写作指南
106 周安装
Excel自动化编程技能:使用ExcelJS、SheetJS、pandas、openpyxl创建、读取、修改XLSX文件
106 周安装
任务与产品需求文档创建器 - 结构化规划工具,提升开发流程与项目管理效率
107 周安装
audio-production - Claude AI音频制作技能,集成GitHub Copilot等主流开发工具
108 周安装
Arduino项目构建器 - 快速搭建环境监测、机器人、物联网等完整项目
107 周安装
| team_size | Number of FTE engineers | 3 |
| target_phases | Desired number of phases | Auto-calculate |
Risk Assessment :
Testing Strategy :
Acceptance Criteria :