
Retro
- 15 installs
- 7 repo stars
- Updated June 18, 2026
- duc01226/easyplatform
Facilitates a sprint retrospective.
About
Guides a sprint retrospective session for a team. A developer or scrum lead runs it at sprint end to structure the retro.
- Sprint retrospective facilitation
- Structured retro flow
Retro by the numbers
- 15 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #2,109 of 3,282 Productivity & Planning skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Jul 29, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill retroAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 15 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 7 |
| Last updated | June 18, 2026 |
| Repository | duc01226/easyplatform ↗ |
What it does
Facilitates a sprint retrospective.
Files
Codex compatibility note:
>
- Invoke repository skills with$skill-namein Codex; this mirrored copy rewrites legacy Claude/skill-namereferences.
- Task tracker mandate: BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all steps and keep it synchronized as progress changes.
- User-question prompts mean to ask the user directly in Codex.
- Ignore Claude-specific mode-switch instructions when they appear.
- Strict execution contract: when a user explicitly invokes a skill, execute that skill protocol as written.
- Subagent authorization: when a skill is user-invoked or AI-detected and its protocol requires subagents, that skill activation authorizes use of the required spawn_agent subagent(s) for that task.- Do not skip, reorder, or merge protocol steps unless the user explicitly approves the deviation first.
- For workflow skills, execute each listed child-skill step explicitly and report step-by-step evidence.
- If a required step/tool cannot run in this environment, stop and ask the user before adapting.
<!-- CODEX:PROJECT-REFERENCE-LOADING:START -->
Codex Project-Reference Loading (No Hooks)
Codex does not receive Claude hook-based doc injection. When coding, planning, debugging, testing, or reviewing, open project docs explicitly using this routing.
Always read:
docs/project-config.json(project-specific paths, commands, modules, and workflow/test settings)docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md(routes to the fulldocs/project-reference/*catalog)docs/project-reference/lessons.md(always-on guardrails and anti-patterns)
Situation-based docs:
- Backend/CQRS/API/domain/entity changes:
backend-patterns-reference.md,domain-entities-reference.md,project-structure-reference.md - Frontend/UI/styling/design-system:
frontend-patterns-reference.md,scss-styling-guide.md,design-system/README.md - Spec/test-case planning or TC mapping:
feature-docs-reference.md - Integration test implementation/review:
integration-test-reference.md - E2E test implementation/review:
e2e-test-reference.md - Code review/audit work:
code-review-rules.mdplus domain docs above based on changed files
Do not read all docs blindly. Start from docs-index-reference.md, then open only relevant files for the task.
<!-- CODEX:PROJECT-REFERENCE-LOADING:END -->
Quick Summary
Goal: Facilitate sprint retrospective with structured feedback collection.
Workflow:
1. What went well — Collect positive outcomes, wins, good practices 2. What didn't go well — Identify pain points, blockers, frustrations 3. Action items — Concrete improvements for next sprint 4. Metrics — Sprint velocity, completion rate, bug count
Key Rules:
- Focus on process improvements, not blame
- Every "didn't go well" should have a proposed action item
- Action items must be specific, assignable, and time-bound
- Output to plans/reports/ directory
Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).
Retrospective Structure
1. Data Gathering
- Review sprint status report (if available from
$status) - Collect git activity: commits, PRs merged, branches
- Review task completion rate
2. What Went Well
- Identify practices worth continuing
- Celebrate wins and improvements from previous action items
3. What Didn't Go Well
- Identify friction points, blockers, delays
- Look for patterns across multiple sprints
- No blame — focus on systemic issues
4. Action Items
Each action item must have:
- Description — What needs to change
- Owner — Who is responsible
- Deadline — When it should be addressed
- Success criteria — How we know it's done
Output Format
## Sprint Retrospective
**Sprint:** [Sprint name/number]
**Date:** {date}
**Output:** plans/reports/retro-{date}-{sprint}.md
### What Went Well
- [Positive item]
### What Didn't Go Well
- [Pain point] → Action: [proposed fix]
### Action Items
| # | Action | Owner | Deadline | Status |
|---|--------|-------|----------|--------|
| 1 | [Action] | [Who] | [When] | Pending |
### Metrics
- Planned: X items | Completed: Y | Completion rate: Z%IMPORTANT Task Planning Notes (MUST ATTENTION FOLLOW)
- Always plan and break work into many small todo tasks using task tracking
- Always add a final review todo task to verify work quality and identify fixes/enhancements
---
[IMPORTANT] Use task tracking to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.
<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->
Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act.
Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset -->
<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first -->
Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.
>
1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — citefile:lineevidence
2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
3. Runpython .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --jsonwhen.code-graph/graph.dbexists
4. Map dependencies viaconnectionsorcallers_of— know what depends on your target
5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone. — why: long context drifts from the file; the file is ground truth
7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation. — why: divergent patterns fragment the codebase and slow every future reader
>
BLOCKED until:- [ ]Read target files- [ ]Grep 3+ patterns- [ ]Graph trace (if graph.db exists)- [ ]Assumptions verified with evidence
<!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first -->
<!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->
AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:
>
Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal.
Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing.
Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain.
Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path.
When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code.
Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks.
Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis.
Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly.
Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention -->
<!-- SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder -->
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists.
<!-- /SYNC:understand-code-first:reminder -->
<!-- SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->
MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.
<!-- /SYNC:critical-thinking-mindset:reminder -->
<!-- SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->
MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.
<!-- /SYNC:ai-mistake-prevention:reminder -->
Closing Reminders
IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using task tracking BEFORE starting IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:
[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using task tracking.
<!-- CODEX:SYNC-PROMPT-PROTOCOLS:START -->
Hookless Prompt Protocol Mirror (Auto-Synced)
Source: .claude/hooks/lib/prompt-injections.cjs + .claude/.ck.json
[WORKFLOW-EXECUTION-PROTOCOL] [BLOCKING] Workflow Execution Protocol — MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST CRITICAL. Do not skip for any reason.
Generic portability boundary: Reusable skills and protocol text stay project-neutral; project-specific conventions are discovered from docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/. Apply shared AI-SDD from shared/sdd-artifact-contract.md. Read docs/project-config.json and docs/project-reference/docs-index-reference.md, then open the project reference docs named there. Any supported AI tool may execute when this shared context and local docs are available.
1. DETECT: Match prompt against workflow catalog 2. ANALYZE: Find best-match workflow AND evaluate if a custom step combination would fit better 3. ASK (REQUIRED FORMAT): Use a direct user question with this structure unless the user explicitly invoked a workflow/skill and the local protocol treats explicit invocation as confirmation:
- Question: "Which workflow do you want to activate?"
- Option 1: "Activate [BestMatch Workflow] (Recommended)"
- Option 2: "Activate custom workflow: [step1 → step2 → ...]" (include one-line rationale)
4. ACTIVATE (if confirmed): Call $workflow-start <workflowId> for standard; sequence custom steps manually 5. CREATE TASKS: task tracking for ALL workflow steps 6. EXECUTE: Follow each step in sequence [CRITICAL-THINKING-MINDSET] Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination principle: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. AI Attention principle (Primacy-Recency): Put the 3 most critical rules at both top and bottom of long prompts/protocols so instruction adherence survives long context windows. Goal-driven execution: Define success criteria first, loop until verified, and stop only when observable checks pass. Tests verify intent: Tests must protect business rules/invariants and fail when the protected intent breaks, not only mirror current behavior.
[LESSON-LEARNED-REMINDER] [BLOCKING] Task Planning & Continuous Improvement — MANDATORY. Do not skip.
Break work into small tasks (task tracking) before starting. Add final task: "Analyze AI mistakes & lessons learned".
Extract lessons — ROOT CAUSE ONLY, not symptom fixes:
1. Name the FAILURE MODE (reasoning/assumption failure), not symptom — "assumed API existed without reading source" not "used wrong enum value". 2. Generality test: does this failure mode apply to ≥3 contexts/codebases? If not, abstract one level up. 3. Write as a universal rule — strip project-specific names/paths/classes. Useful on any codebase. 4. Consolidate: multiple mistakes sharing one failure mode → ONE lesson. 5. Recurrence gate: "Would this recur in future session WITHOUT this reminder?" — No → skip $learn. 6. Auto-fix gate: "Could $code-review/$code-simplifier/$security/$lint catch this?" — Yes → improve review skill instead. 7. BOTH gates pass → ask user to run $learn. [TASK-PLANNING] [MANDATORY] BEFORE executing any workflow or skill step, create/update task tracking for all planned steps, then keep it synchronized as each step starts/completes.
<!-- CODEX:SYNC-PROMPT-PROTOCOLS:END -->