Estimate Calibrator
Replaces single-point guesses with structured three-point estimates: decomposes work into atomic units, estimates best/likely/worst case for each, identifies unknowns and assumptions, calculates aggregate ranges using PERT, and assigns confidence levels with explicit rationale.
Reference Files
| File | Contents | Load When |
|---|---|---|
references/estimation-methods.md | PERT formula, three-point estimation, Monte Carlo basics | Always |
references/unknown-categories.md | Technical, scope, external, and organizational uncertainty types | Unknown identification |
references/calibration-tips.md | Cognitive biases in estimation, historical calibration, buffer strategies | Always |
references/sizing-heuristics.md | Common task size patterns, complexity indicators, reference class data | Quick sizing needed |
Prerequisites
- Work item description (feature, task, project)
- Decomposed tasks (or use task-decomposer skill first)
- Context: team familiarity, tech stack, existing codebase
Workflow
Phase 1: Decompose Work
If the work item is not already decomposed into atomic units:
- Break into tasks — Each task should be estimable independently.
- Right granularity — Tasks should be 1 hour to 3 days. Larger tasks have higher uncertainty; break them down further.
- Identify dependencies — Tasks on the critical path determine the minimum duration.
Phase 2: Three-Point Estimate
For each task, estimate three scenarios:
| Scenario | Definition | Mindset |
|---|---|---|
| Best case | Everything goes right. No surprises. | "If I've done this exact thing before" |
| Likely case | Normal friction. Some minor obstacles. | "Realistic expectation with typical setbacks" |
| Worst case | Significant problems. Not catastrophic. | "Murphy's law but not a disaster" |
Key rule: Worst case is NOT "everything goes wrong." It's the realistic bad scenario (90th percentile), not the apocalyptic one (99th percentile).
Phase 3: Identify Unknowns
Categorize unknowns that affect estimates:
| Category | Example | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | "Never used this library before" | Likely case inflated, worst case much higher |
| Scope | "Requirements may change" | All estimates may shift |
| External | "Depends on API access from partner" | Blocking risk — could delay entirely |
| Integration | "Haven't tested with production data" | Hidden complexity at integration |
| Organizational | "Need design approval" | Calendar time, not effort time |
Phase 4: Calculate Ranges
For individual tasks, use the PERT formula:
textExpected = (Best + 4 × Likely + Worst) / 6 Std Dev = (Worst - Best) / 6
For aggregate (project) estimates:
- Sum of expected values for total expected duration
- Root sum of squares of std devs for aggregate uncertainty
Phase 5: Assign Confidence
| Confidence | Meaning | When |
|---|---|---|
| High | Likely case within ±20% | Well-understood task, team has done it before |
| Medium | Likely case within ±50% | Some unknowns, moderate familiarity |
| Low | Likely case within ±100% or more | Significant unknowns, new technology |
Output Format
text## Estimate: {Work Item} ### Summary | Scenario | Duration | |----------|----------| | Best case | {time} | | Likely case | {time} | | Worst case | {time} | | **PERT expected** | **{time}** | | **Confidence** | **{High/Medium/Low}** | ### Task-Level Estimates | # | Task | Best | Likely | Worst | PERT | Unknowns | |---|------|------|--------|-------|------|----------| | 1 | {task} | {time} | {time} | {time} | {time} | {key unknown or "None"} | | 2 | {task} | {time} | {time} | {time} | {time} | {key unknown} | | | **Total** | **{sum}** | **{sum}** | **{sum}** | **{pert}** | | ### Key Unknowns | # | Unknown | Category | Impact on Estimate | Mitigation | |---|---------|----------|-------------------|------------| | 1 | {unknown} | {Technical/Scope/External} | +{time} if realized | {spike, prototype, early test} | ### Assumptions - {Assumption 1 — what must be true for this estimate to hold} - {Assumption 2} ### Risk Factors - {Risk}: If realized, adds {time}. Likelihood: {High/Medium/Low}. ### Confidence Rationale **{High/Medium/Low}** because: - {Specific reason — e.g., "Team has built 3 similar features"} - {Specific reason — e.g., "External API is a new integration"} ### Recommendation {Commit to PERT expected with {X}% buffer, or spike the top unknown first.}
Calibration Rules
- Three points, not one. Single-point estimates are always wrong. Three points communicate uncertainty — the most important part of any estimate.
- Worst case is the 90th percentile, not the 99th. "Asteroid hits the office" is not a useful worst case. "The API documentation is wrong and we need to reverse-engineer the protocol" is realistic worst case.
- Unknowns inflate estimates more than known difficulty. A hard but well-understood task is more predictable than an easy but novel one.
- Estimates are not commitments. Communicate ranges, not deadlines. If stakeholders need a single number, give the PERT expected plus a buffer for confidence level.
- Spike unknowns early. If a single unknown dominates the estimate range, invest 1-2 days spiking it before estimating the rest.
Error Handling
| Problem | Resolution |
|---|---|
| Work item not decomposed | Decompose into 3-8 tasks first (or suggest task-decomposer skill). |
| No historical reference | Estimate relative to a known task: "This is about 2x the auth feature." |
| Stakeholder wants a single number | Provide PERT expected with buffer matching confidence level (High: +20%, Medium: +50%, Low: +100%). |
| Estimate seems too large | Check for scope creep in task list. Remove non-essential tasks. Identify what can be deferred. |
| Team has never done this type of work | Mark confidence as Low. Recommend a spike before committing to an estimate. |
When NOT to Estimate
Push back if:
- The work is exploratory (research, spikes) — timebox instead of estimating
- Requirements are completely undefined — define scope first
- The user wants precision (hours) for a large project — provide ranges, not false precision
- The estimate will be used as a commitment without acknowledging uncertainty

