Spike Summary

VerifiedSafe

Captures findings from time-boxed technical or design explorations (spikes) to reduce uncertainty before implementation decisions. The summary documents the question, approach, evidence, and clear recommendations so the team can act without repeated explanations. Best used after completing a spike to inform technology choices, feasibility studies, or proof-of-concept evaluations.

Sby Skills Guide Bot
DocumentationBeginner
1406/2/2026
Claude Code
#spike#summary#exploration#documentation#findings

Recommended for

Our review

Documents the results of a time-boxed technical or design exploration (spike) to capture learnings and recommendations for the team.

Strengths

  • Clear, reproducible structure for documenting explorations
  • Enables informed team decisions based on concrete evidence
  • Captures code samples, benchmarks, and screenshots as proof
  • Reduces need for verbal repetition by spike participants

Limitations

  • Requires discipline to follow the template and respect the time-box
  • May be overkill for very simple or informal investigations
  • Does not replace thorough validation if the spike is too short
When to use it

Use after completing a time-boxed exploration to share findings and recommendations with the team.

When not to use it

Avoid when findings are obvious or can be communicated verbally without loss of information.

Security analysis

Safe
Quality score90/100

This skill is a documentation template with no executable instructions, no declared tools, and no capability to perform destructive or exfiltrating actions. It poses no execution risk.

No concerns found

Examples

API Integration Spike
Document the results of our three-day spike investigating whether we can integrate with the Stripe Payment Intents API for recurring billing. Include our approach, evidence from test calls, and a clear recommendation.
Technology Feasibility Spike
Create a spike summary for our two-day exploration of using WebAssembly to offload image processing in the browser. State the question, approach, performance benchmarks, and recommendation.
Vendor Evaluation Spike
Summarize the findings from last week's spike comparing cloud providers AWS Lambda vs Google Cloud Functions for our serverless backend. Include artifacts and open questions.
<!-- PM-Skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/pm-skills | Apache 2.0 -->

name: spike-summary description: Documents the results of a time-boxed technical or design exploration (spike). Use after completing a spike to capture learnings, findings, and recommendations for the team. license: Apache-2.0 metadata: category: coordination frameworks: [triple-diamond, lean-startup, design-thinking] author: product-on-purpose version: "1.0.0"

Spike Summary

A spike summary documents the results of a time-boxed exploration — a focused investigation to reduce uncertainty before committing to implementation. Spikes answer specific questions like "Can we integrate with this API?" or "Is this technology viable for our use case?" The summary captures findings so the team can make informed decisions without the spike participants needing to repeat explanations.

When to Use

  • After completing a time-boxed technical exploration
  • When evaluating technology choices or vendor options
  • After proof-of-concept work that needs to inform team decisions
  • When investigating feasibility of a proposed solution
  • Before committing engineering resources to a new approach

Instructions

When asked to document a spike, follow these steps:

  1. State the Question Clearly Articulate the specific question the spike was designed to answer. Good spike questions are focused and answerable with the time-box available. If the question evolved during the spike, document both the original and final versions.

  2. Define the Time-Box Document the time allocated (e.g., 3 days) and actual time spent. If the spike exceeded its time-box, explain why and note any remaining work.

  3. Describe the Approach Explain what was tried, in what order, and why. This helps future readers understand the methodology and whether alternative approaches were considered.

  4. Present Findings with Evidence Document what was learned, supported by concrete evidence — code samples, performance benchmarks, screenshots, or API responses. Distinguish between verified findings and hypotheses that need more testing.

  5. Make a Clear Recommendation Answer the original question directly: proceed, do not proceed, or proceed with conditions. Avoid hedging — the team needs actionable guidance.

  6. Document Artifacts Link to any code, prototypes, diagrams, or documentation created during the spike. These artifacts often have ongoing value beyond the summary.

  7. Capture Open Questions Note what the spike didn't answer and what additional investigation might be needed.

Output Format

Use the template in references/TEMPLATE.md to structure the output.

Quality Checklist

Before finalizing, verify:

  • [ ] Original question is clearly stated
  • [ ] Time-box is documented (allocated vs. actual)
  • [ ] Findings are supported by evidence, not just opinions
  • [ ] Recommendation directly answers the question
  • [ ] Artifacts (code, diagrams) are linked or attached
  • [ ] Open questions identify remaining unknowns

Examples

See references/EXAMPLE.md for a completed example.

Related skills