skills/reviews-retros-reflection/SKILL.md
Facilitates structured team reflection through retrospectives, post-mortems, after-action reviews, and weekly/quarterly reviews, producing root cause analysis and SMART action items with psychological safety. Use when conducting sprint retrospectives, project post-mortems, weekly reviews, quarterly reflections, after-action reviews (AARs), or when user mentions "retro", "retrospective", "what went well", "lessons learned", "reflection", or "how can we improve".
npx skillsauth add lyndonkl/claude reviews-retros-reflectionInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Retrospective Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Set the stage (context, psychological safety)
- [ ] Step 2: Gather data (what happened)
- [ ] Step 3: Generate insights (why it happened)
- [ ] Step 4: Decide actions (what to change)
- [ ] Step 5: Close and follow up (commit, track)
Step 1: Set the stage
Define period/scope, review previous action items, establish psychological safety (Prime Directive: "everyone did best job given knowledge/skills/resources/context"). For quick reviews → Use resources/template.md. For complex team retros → Study resources/methodology.md.
Step 2: Gather data
Collect facts about period: metrics (velocity, bugs, incidents), events (launches, blockers, decisions), sentiment (team energy, morale). See Retrospective Formats for collection methods.
Step 3: Generate insights
Identify patterns, root causes, surprises. Ask "why?" to move from symptoms to causes. Use resources/methodology.md for root cause techniques (5 Whys, fishbone diagrams, timeline analysis).
Step 4: Decide actions
Vote on most impactful improvements (dot voting, SMART criteria). Define 1-3 SMART actions (Specific, Measurable, Assigned owner, Realistic, Time-bound). See Common Patterns for action quality criteria.
Step 5: Close and follow up
Commit to actions, schedule check-in, thank participants. Track action completion rate (target: >80% completion before next retro). Self-check using resources/evaluators/rubric_reviews_retros_reflection.json before closing. Minimum standard: Average score ≥ 3.5.
Start/Stop/Continue (Simple, Balanced):
Mad/Sad/Glad (Emotion-Focused):
4Ls (Comprehensive):
Sailboat/Speedboat (Metaphor-Based):
Timeline (Chronological):
Pattern 1: Sprint Retrospective (Agile)
Pattern 2: Project Post-Mortem
Pattern 3: Weekly Team Review
Pattern 4: Incident Retrospective
Psychological safety:
Quality standards:
Common pitfalls to avoid:
Resources:
resources/evaluators/rubric_reviews_retros_reflection.json5-Stage Process: Set Stage → Gather Data → Generate Insights → Decide Actions → Close
Top Formats:
Action Quality: SMART criteria + <5 total + >80% completion rate
Psychological Safety: Prime Directive + Blameless + Confidential
testing
--- name: advisory-edit description: A strict advisory-only editing discipline for a writer who dictates ("speaks out") essays and wants help WITHOUT having their voice changed. The editor directs structure, flags grammar, and suggests strategic language — but never modifies the writer's text unless the writer explicitly says "apply" / "make that change" / "rewrite this." Produces a line-referenced, suggestion-only critique where every item is marked the writer's call. Four passes: structural, l
testing
Provides the house style for analyst-grade strategist writing — third-person register with sparing first-person, no em dashes, no "not X, not Y, not Z" negation cascades, numbered footnote citations rather than inline source parentheticals, specific opinion-signaling phrases, and topic-forward paragraph structure modeled on voice patterns observed in Damodaran's Musings on Markets and Thompson's Stratechery. Use when consolidating working notes into a finished long-form strategist or analyst report that must read as written by a senior human analyst rather than an AI assistant.
testing
Renders a markdown report to a PDF using pandoc with xelatex (11pt serif body, 1-inch margins, numbered footnotes, formal heading hierarchy). Requires a one-time install of pandoc and a LaTeX engine on the user's machine — basictex on macOS or texlive-xetex on Linux. Does not attempt automatic install. Fails loudly with the exact install commands if pandoc or xelatex is missing on the user's PATH. Use when producing a finished strategist or analyst report PDF from a polished markdown source.
testing
Produces step-by-step computational walkthroughs of vector and matrix operations as a sequence of numbered "frames", showing the explicit state at each step. The text-equivalent of a 3Blue1Brown animation — each frame shows what changed and why, so the learner can re-trace the operation by hand. Use when the learner needs to *see* a computation unfold (eigenvalue computation, attention with 3 tokens, gradient descent step, SVD on a 2×2, layer norm on a 3-vector, softmax of a small input), when an explanation has been given but the learner needs to ground it in a worked example, or when introducing an operation that's intimidating in symbol form but trivial in pencil-and-paper form.