TokenPoker

TokenPoker

Sprint poker alternative

A sprint poker alternative for AI teams

Sprint poker alternative

A sprint poker alternative for AI-driven teams

Most sprint poker tools help teams estimate story points. Token Poker keeps that familiar ritual, but adds a second estimate: expected AI token usage.

If your team builds with AI coding tools, a story point alone no longer describes a ticket. Token Poker is a sprint poker alternative built for that reality.

Why teams look for sprint poker alternatives

Classic planning poker is great at one job: getting a team to agree on effort. But teams increasingly want more from a single planning round. They want to surface cost, spot AI-heavy work early, and avoid surprises once implementation starts.

Common reasons teams shop for a planning poker alternative include wanting a cleaner reveal flow, no login friction, and — for AI-assisted teams — a way to capture expected token usage next to the usual effort estimate.

What normal planning poker misses in AI-assisted development

When a team uses AI coding tools, two tickets with the same story-point score can have completely different costs. One is a quick, well-scoped change. The other needs large context windows, repeated prompting, and careful review. Story points treat them as equal; the AI bill does not.

A standard sprint poker tool has no place to record that difference. The conversation about token burn, prompting strategy, and model choice happens informally, if at all, and the signal is lost.

Story points

Describe implementation effort, complexity, and risk — the signal every agile team already understands.

Token estimates

Describe expected AI usage: prompting intensity, context size, and the rough cost of getting the task done with AI.

Both, in one round

Token Poker captures effort and AI cost in the same reveal, so the team leaves with a fuller picture of each ticket.

Story points vs token estimates

Story points and token estimates answer different questions. Story points ask “how hard is this to build?” Token estimates ask “how much AI usage will this likely consume?” In AI-assisted teams, both signals can matter for prioritization, budgeting, and deciding what to automate next.

Keeping them as two separate votes is deliberate. It keeps the familiar story-point discussion intact while making AI cost an explicit, first-class part of planning rather than a hidden assumption.

When Token Poker is better than classic planning poker

Token Poker is the stronger choice when your team ships with AI coding tools and AI usage is a real cost or planning variable. If you want to spot expensive, context-heavy, or automation-risky tickets before implementation, the second estimate earns its place.

When classic planning poker is enough

If your team does not use AI coding tools in delivery, or AI usage is negligible, a classic planning poker tool is perfectly fine. The token estimate only adds value when AI cost is a genuine part of how the work gets done. We would rather be honest about that than oversell a second number you do not need.

Start an AI-aware sprint poker room

Keep the planning poker ritual your team trusts, and add a token forecast to every ticket. Free to create, no login required.

Create a planning room