Retrospective

Name: Retrospective
Author: gonimar

ASecurity

Sprint retrospective from artefacts — planned vs shipped, estimate vs actual per story (the calibration ratio /sprint-plan applies to the next sprint), blockers and their causes, incidents and findings of the period, process actions with owners; writes the Retrospective section of the sprint file and carries the actions into the roadmap. Use at sprint end, before /sprint-plan for the next sprint.

3 stars

0 votes

0 copies

0 views

Added 9/22/2026

ai-agentsgobashgit

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 9/22/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add gonimar/claude-web-studio --skill retrospective --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Retrospective?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/gonimar-retrospective/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/gonimar-retrospective)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download with Pro

Files

SKILL.md

---
name: retrospective
description: "Sprint retrospective from artefacts — planned vs shipped, estimate vs actual per story (the calibration ratio /sprint-plan applies to the next sprint), blockers and their causes, incidents and findings of the period, process actions with owners; writes the Retrospective section of the sprint file and carries the actions into the roadmap. Use at sprint end, before /sprint-plan for the next sprint."
argument-hint: "[sprint NN]"
user-invocable: true
allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash, Write, Edit, AskUserQuestion
model: sonnet
---

# Retrospective

Reply in the project conversation language (CLAUDE.md → Language); code, identifiers, paths and commit messages stay in English.

Template `sprint-plan.md` (`## Retrospective` section); roadmap markers `~Nh` (estimate) and `⏱ Nh` (actual, written
by `/story-done`) per `templates/roadmap.md`. Blameless: causes are in the system and the process, never in a person
or an agent by name. Writes only after "May I write?".

## Phase 1: Data
The sprint file (`production/sprints/sprint-NN.md`: goal, selected stories, capacity, dependency updates, actions
from the last retrospective), the roadmap lines of those stories (status, `~Nh`, `⏱ Nh`, `🔗 PR`), `gh pr list
--state merged` for the period, `production/findings.md` (findings opened/closed in the period), incidents and
hotfixes dated inside the sprint (`docs/ops/incidents/`, `hotfix/*` branches), `production/session-logs/compaction.log`
(how often context was lost), and the `Blocked:`/`Notes:` lines that stories or session-state recorded. Missing
`⏱` on a Done story → counted as "no actual" and named (it is `/story-done`'s job to record it).

## Phase 2: Analysis
Rendered in the chat as tables (rule 7):
1. **Planned vs shipped** — per story: planned · Done/carried over/cancelled · PR · `~Nh` · `⏱ Nh` · ratio.
   Sprint totals: Σ estimate, Σ actual, and **two ratios that are never merged into one number**: this sprint's
   (Σ⏱ / Σ~ over its own stories, labelled "this sprint") and the **rolling calibration ratio** over the last six
   closed stories of the roadmap carrying both numbers, labelled "rolling, used by /sprint-plan" — the same sample
   `/sprint-plan` reads, so the two skills never quote different numbers under the same name (fewer than three
   stories in the rolling sample → "insufficient data, ratio not applied"). Write both exactly as computed, never
   rounded to a nicer story.
2. **Goal** — met / partially / not, with the evidence (the verifiable statement from the plan against what exists).
3. **What slowed us** — carried-over stories with the recorded cause (blocked by …, spec gap, red CI, dependency,
   context lost N times), findings and incidents of the period, actions from the previous retrospective that were
   not done.
4. **What worked** — one line each, only with evidence.

## Phase 3: Actions
Each action: what · owner (the user, or the command that will do it: `/feature-spec`, `/test-setup`, a rule in
`CLAUDE.md`, a story) · where it lands (roadmap line, story card, sprint file, `CLAUDE.md`, a studio issue when the
cause is a skill or hook — with the evidence a `/skill-test spec` could check) · due date. At most five; an action
without an owner and a place is not an action. Show the list, then one `AskUserQuestion`: accept the actions
(Recommended) · edit them · drop the retrospective.

## Phase 4: Write
"May I write the `## Retrospective` section into `production/sprints/sprint-NN.md` (ratio, tables, actions) and add
the accepted actions to `production/roadmap.md` (as stories or lines under Backlog with `🏷 process`)?" — one
`AskUserQuestion`: write (Recommended) · show the draft/diff first · not now. After the "write" answer: `touch
.claude/.write-consent` (rule 7 — the consent-guard hook checks the marker). Then one commit gate: `docs: retrospective
sprint NN` staging exactly the written files, on the default branch (documents lane of git-workflow).

Verdict: `COMPLETE (ratio R over N stories, M actions)` | `COMPLETE (insufficient data for the ratio)` | `BLOCKED (no
sprint file — run /sprint-plan NN first)`. Next step — one `AskUserQuestion`: `/sprint-plan NN+1` (Recommended) ·
`/sprint-status` · stop here.

Attribution

gonimar

View source More from gonimar →

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Know which skills are safe — weekly.

Best new skills + every skill we flagged as malicious. From the team that scanned 103,619.

Join free

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

--- name: retrospective description: "Sprint retrospective from artefacts — planned vs shipped, estimate vs actual per story (the calibration ratio /sprint-plan applies to the next sprint), blockers and their causes, incidents and findings of the period, process actions with owners; writes the Retrospective section of the sprint file and carries the actions into the roadmap. Use at sprint end, before /sprint-plan for the next sprint." argument-hint: "[sprint NN]" user-invocable: true allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash, Write, Edit, AskUserQuestion model: sonnet --- # Retrospective Reply in the project conversation language (CLAUDE.md → Language); code, identifiers, paths and commit messages stay in English. Template `sprint-plan.md` (`## Retrospective` section); roadmap markers `~Nh` (estimate) and `⏱ Nh` (actual, written by `/story-done`) per `templates/roadmap.md`. Blameless: causes are in the system and the process, never in a person or an agent by name. Writes only after "May I write?". ## Phase 1: Data The sprint file (`production/sprints/sprint-NN.md`: goal, selected stories, capacity, dependency updates, actions from the last retrospective), the roadmap lines of those stories (status, `~Nh`, `⏱ Nh`, `🔗 PR`), `gh pr list --state merged` for the period, `production/findings.md` (findings opened/closed in the period), incidents and hotfixes dated inside the sprint (`docs/ops/incidents/`, `hotfix/*` branches), `production/session-logs/compaction.log` (how often context was lost), and the `Blocked:`/`Notes:` lines that stories or session-state recorded. Missing `⏱` on a Done story → counted as "no actual" and named (it is `/story-done`'s job to record it). ## Phase 2: Analysis Rendered in the chat as tables (rule 7): 1. **Planned vs shipped** — per story: planned · Done/carried over/cancelled · PR · `~Nh` · `⏱ Nh` · ratio. Sprint totals: Σ estimate, Σ actual, and **two ratios that are never merged into one number**: this sprint's (Σ⏱ / Σ~ over its own stories, labelled "this sprint") and the **rolling calibration ratio** over the last six closed stories of the roadmap carrying both numbers, labelled "rolling, used by /sprint-plan" — the same sample `/sprint-plan` reads, so the two skills never quote different numbers under the same name (fewer than three stories in the rolling sample → "insufficient data, ratio not applied"). Write both exactly as computed, never rounded to a nicer story. 2. **Goal** — met / partially / not, with the evidence (the verifiable statement from the plan against what exists). 3. **What slowed us** — carried-over stories with the recorded cause (blocked by …, spec gap, red CI, dependency, context lost N times), findings and incidents of the period, actions from the previous retrospective that were not done. 4. **What worked** — one line each, only with evidence. ## Phase 3: Actions Each action: what · owner (the user, or the command that will do it: `/feature-spec`, `/test-setup`, a rule in `CLAUDE.md`, a story) · where it lands (roadmap line, story card, sprint file, `CLAUDE.md`, a studio issue when the cause is a skill or hook — with the evidence a `/skill-test spec` could check) · due date. At most five; an action without an owner and a place is not an action. Show the list, then one `AskUserQuestion`: accept the actions (Recommended) · edit them · drop the retrospective. ## Phase 4: Write "May I write the `## Retrospective` section into `production/sprints/sprint-NN.md` (ratio, tables, actions) and add the accepted actions to `production/roadmap.md` (as stories or lines under Backlog with `🏷 process`)?" — one `AskUserQuestion`: write (Recommended) · show the draft/diff first · not now. After the "write" answer: `touch .claude/.write-consent` (rule 7 — the consent-guard hook checks the marker). Then one commit gate: `docs: retrospective sprint NN` staging exactly the written files, on the default branch (documents lane of git-workflow). Verdict: `COMPLETE (ratio R over N stories, M actions)` | `COMPLETE (insufficient data for the ratio)` | `BLOCKED (no sprint file — run /sprint-plan NN first)`. Next step — one `AskUserQuestion`: `/sprint-plan NN+1` (Recommended) · `/sprint-status` · stop here.