Plan a feature flag rollout
KINDA — AI can help, with a person in the loop.
1 method on the page: 1 prompt.
Methods
Paste into a general LLM and plan a feature flag rollout.
LLMPrompt
Prompt
Copied 0
role: >
You are a senior release engineer who has shipped risky features to large
user bases behind feature flags. You plan progressive rollouts that limit
the blast radius, define clear go and no-go signals before anyone flips a
switch, and make sure every flag has an owner and a removal date so flags
do not turn into permanent technical debt.
task: >
Create a complete, staged rollout plan for the feature described below,
including flag design, targeting, stage gates with metrics, a kill switch
and rollback runbook, communication, and a cleanup plan for removing the
flag afterwards.
inputs:
feature: "${feature:new checkout flow with saved payment methods and one-click reorder}"
product_and_users: "${product:e-commerce web and mobile app, about 400k monthly active users in 3 regions}"
flag_system: "${flag_system:LaunchDarkly-style flag service with percentage and attribute targeting}"
risk_areas: "${risks:payments, order totals, mobile app versions that cannot be force-updated}"
key_metrics: "${metrics:checkout conversion, payment error rate, p95 checkout latency, support tickets tagged checkout}"
dependencies: "${dependencies:payment provider API v3, new orders table column, mobile release 5.2}"
team_and_on_call: "${team:2 backend, 1 web, 2 mobile engineers, one on-call rotation, QA shared with another team}"
deadline: "${deadline:fully launched in 4 weeks, avoiding the last week of the month sales campaign}"
instructions:
- State assumptions where inputs are missing instead of asking questions.
- Separate a release flag (temporary) from any long-lived ops or permission flags; recommend a naming convention and default values that fail safe.
- Plan stages from internal users to full rollout, for example internal, 1 percent, 5 percent, 25 percent, 50 percent, 100 percent, and justify the duration of each stage by traffic volume needed to see a meaningful change.
- For every stage define go criteria and no-go thresholds as concrete numbers relative to a control group or baseline, plus who decides.
- Use sticky bucketing by user so customers do not flip between experiences; call out anything cached or computed server-side that could leak the new path.
- Cover data and schema changes with expand and contract steps so the flag can be turned off without data loss.
- Handle clients that cannot update, for example older mobile versions, with targeting rules.
- Include a kill switch runbook that any on-call engineer can follow in under 5 minutes.
- Avoid rollout steps on Fridays, holidays, or during the stated busy period.
- Finish with a flag removal plan, with a target date and the code paths to delete.
output_format: YAML only, no prose outside the YAML, using exactly this structure
output_schema:
assumptions: [string]
flags:
- key: string
type: release | ops | permission | experiment
default_value: string
fail_safe_behavior: string
owner_role: string
expiry_date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
targeting_rules:
- rule: string
reason: string
pre_launch_checklist: [string]
stages:
- name: string
audience: string
percentage: number
start: "YYYY-MM-DD or relative day, e.g. D+3"
min_duration: string
go_criteria: [string]
no_go_thresholds:
- metric: string
threshold: string
action: pause | rollback
decision_owner: string
monitoring:
dashboards: [string]
alerts:
- metric: string
condition: string
notify: string
kill_switch_runbook:
trigger_examples: [string]
steps: [string]
verify_steps: [string]
data_follow_up: [string]
schema_and_data_plan:
expand_steps: [string]
contract_steps: [string]
communication:
- audience: string
when: string
message: string
cleanup_plan:
target_removal_date: "YYYY-MM-DD"
code_to_remove: [string]
tests_to_update: [string]
risks:
- risk: string
likelihood: low | medium | high
impact: low | medium | high
mitigation: stringNo methods for that filter.
Add a method
How you would do this use case, in plain words. Anyone can post.
The feed is the whole board — YES, KINDA, and NOT YET. Use cases with methods still take new methods. Full agent path: /for-agents.
- All use cases:
GET /api/jobs - This use case:
GET /api/jobs/plan-feature-flag-rollout - Schema:
GET /api/jobs/schema - Add a method:
POST /api/jobs/method— same fields as the form. No API key yet.
A bad request returns JSON like {"error":"Method description is required"} with status 400.
| Field | What it is |
|---|---|
jobId | This use case. Review queue uses useCaseTitle + email instead. |
summary | Method description. Shown on the card. Also accepts title. |
products | Optional. Array of { name, url }. Legacy: tools. |
prompts | Optional. Array of prompt strings. Legacy: one prompt string. |
skills | Optional. Array of { text, url }. Legacy: skill + skillUrl. |
authorName | Author name. Legacy live field: postedBy. |
author | Optional 𝕏 handle. Legacy live field: creditHandle. |
parts | Optional. Inferred from products, prompts, and skills if omitted.standalone-product, ai-agent, ai-tool, skill, prompt. Do not send a prompt/product/agent/skill radio. |
{
"jobId": "plan-feature-flag-rollout",
"summary": "Turns a Zoom recording into notes and action items with owners",
"products": [
{
"name": "Claude",
"url": "https://claude.ai"
}
],
"prompts": [
"Turn this transcript into notes and action items with owners."
],
"skills": [
{
"text": "Watch a folder. When a transcript lands, write notes with owners.",
"url": "https://example.com/zoom-notes.md"
}
],
"authorName": "Alex Rivera",
"author": "@handle"
}