Files
Donchitos 984023ddac Release v1.0.0 — concept-prototype/vertical-slice split, workflow restructure, polish (#50)
* Add /vertical-slice skill, prototype overhaul, and workflow integration

- Add /vertical-slice skill for pre-production validation (Phase 4 gate)
- Overhaul /prototype skill with two-mode design: concept prototype (Phase 1)
  vs vertical slice (Phase 4), with clearer differentiation and higher standards for VS
- Update prototyper agent to own both prototype and vertical-slice workflows
- Add prototype-report.md and vertical-slice-report.md output templates
- Update WORKFLOW-GUIDE, quick-start, skills-reference, agent-coordination-map,
  and skill-flow-diagrams to fully integrate both skills into the 7-phase pipeline
- Remove orphaned empty quick-prototype/ directory

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* sync v1 counts + polish

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Add entity inventory flow, relax vertical-slice gate, improve UX authoring prompts

- /asset-spec: new Phase 0b entity & screen inventory when no argument and no
  existing inventory — reads GDDs/art-bible, proposes categorized list, writes
  design/assets/entity-inventory.md collaboratively
- /asset-spec: entity/character target falls back to inline user description
  when no source doc exists, rather than failing
- /gate-check: vertical slice changed from blocking to CONCERNS-only when
  absent; built-but-broken slice still fails; adds entity inventory as gate artifact
- /ux-design: convert inline approval prompts to AskUserQuestion for structured
  option capture at key authoring decision points
- workflow-catalog.yaml: entity-inventory step added to pre-production; UX spec
  min_count raised to 3; vertical-slice and prototype marked required: false with
  updated descriptions
- .gitignore: exclude marrow/ eval tooling directory

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Add missing AskUserQuestion widgets to 7 skills

Audit found 11 decision points across 7 skills where structured option
prompts were missing — using plain text, auto-selection, or no gate at all.

Skills patched:
- create-epics: per-epic approval + producer CONCERNS verdict
- sprint-plan: producer CONCERNS verdict with scope/timeline options
- milestone-review: AT RISK / OFF TRACK producer verdicts require acknowledgement
- retrospective: existing-retro handling converted from plain text [A]/[B]
- quick-design: classification confirmation + draft approve/revise/redirect
- tech-debt add mode: category (6 options) + effort (S/M/L/XL) structured capture
- regression-suite: no-arg mode selection instead of silent auto-detect
- hotfix: severity confirmation gate before workflow begins

Also added AskUserQuestion to allowed-tools headers for retrospective,
quick-design, tech-debt, regression-suite, and hotfix.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Prep v1 stable: fix WORKFLOW-GUIDE counts, stale agent names, and skill model fields

- WORKFLOW-GUIDE.md: correct agent count (48→49), skill count (66/68→73),
  add 6 missing skills to Appendix B, fix Creative category count (2→4),
  replace 3 non-existent agent names with correct ue-*/unity-* specialists,
  add missing godot-csharp/gdextension specialists to hierarchy,
  fix production/stories/ paths → production/epics/
- coordination-rules.md: replace "not yet used" with opt-in env var note
- quick-start.md: rename duplicate "Validate the concept" label → "Prototype the mechanic"
- skill-flow-diagrams.md: remove duplicate legacy UX pipeline section
- All 62 skills missing model: field now have explicit model: sonnet

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: comprehensive skill audit — consistency, UX, and flow gaps

Two-pass audit fixing ~35 bugs across 41 files.

Pre-production flow:
- Brainstorm next-steps split into Path A (design-first) and Path B
  (prototype-first) — eliminates "prototype after architecture" confusion
- /architecture-review added to pre-production flow in brainstorm and
  create-architecture handoffs
- gate-check traceability check corrected to requirements-traceability.md
- dev-story TR registry error now points to /architecture-review (not /create-epics)
- start now writes production/stage.txt on first onboarding

AskUserQuestion gaps filled:
- balance-check, code-review, hotfix, day-one-patch, consistency-check
  all gain closing widgets and/or missing allowed-tools declarations
- hotfix git branch creation now requires user confirmation
- sprint-plan review-mode setup moved to Phase 0 (before gates run)
- team-combat gains architecture→implementation approval gate
- design-review APPROVED path consolidated from 3 widgets to 1 multiSelect

All 9 team-* skills:
- Phase 0 review-mode resolution added (solo/lean/full now respected)
- team-audio output path fixed (design/gdd/ → design/audio/)
- team-level final doc compilation delegated to level-designer subagent
- team-narrative localization-lead added to composition list
- team-qa sprint path fixed (flat files, not directories)
- team-release NO-GO override captures written justification
- team-live-ops Cancel verdict now explicitly BLOCKED

Other fixes:
- Art bible path standardized to design/art/art-bible.md (3 wrong refs)
- AD-PHASE-GATE added to lean-mode skip list in director-gates.md
- design-system duplicate 5d heading fixed; skeleton decline path added;
  mandatory agent spawns now respect review mode
- story-readiness acceptance criteria thresholds now type-aware
- create-stories gains multi-ADR and no-ADR handling guidance
- consistency-check creates docs/consistency-failures.md on first run
- retrospective frontmatter bash injection replaced with explicit Bash call
- smoke-check ls -t gains PowerShell fallback
- Conventional Commits format documented in coding-standards.md
- gate-check: ADR acceptance gate, QA plan check, chain-of-verification
  tool-action requirement all added

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* fix: expose --review flag in argument-hints for all team-* skills

All 9 team-* skills already implement Phase 0 review-mode resolution
internally (full/lean/solo), but none advertised [--review full|lean|solo]
in their argument-hint. Users had no way to discover the per-run override.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: add SECURITY.md with coordinated disclosure policy

Defines scope, reporting process (GitHub private vulnerability reporting),
contributor security guidelines for hooks/skills/agents, and 90-day
coordinated disclosure timeline.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: add CONTRIBUTING.md with framework contribution guidelines

Covers what PRs are welcome, skill/hook/agent technical requirements,
the collaborative principle, testing expectations, commit format,
and platform compatibility requirements.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs: add v1.0.0-beta → v1.0 upgrade section to UPGRADING.md

Documents the 17 commits since the beta tag: new /vertical-slice gate,
entity inventory flow in /map-systems, AskUserQuestion widgets across
7 skills, --review flag exposure on team-* skills, bug fixes
(#21, #36, #42, #43, #45), and the new CONTRIBUTING.md and SECURITY.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-13 20:15:08 +10:00

8.2 KiB

name, description, argument-hint, user-invocable, allowed-tools, model
name description argument-hint user-invocable allowed-tools model
sprint-status Fast sprint status check. Reads the current sprint plan, scans story files for status, and produces a concise progress snapshot with burndown assessment and emerging risks. Run at any time during a sprint for quick situational awareness. Use when user asks 'how is the sprint going', 'sprint update', 'show sprint progress'. [sprint-number or blank for current] true Read, Glob, Grep haiku

Sprint Status

This is a fast situational awareness check, not a sprint review. It reads the current sprint plan and story files, scans for status markers, and produces a concise snapshot in under 30 lines. For detailed sprint management, use /sprint-plan update or /milestone-review.

This skill is read-only. It never proposes changes, never asks to write files, and makes at most one concrete recommendation.


1. Find the Sprint

Argument: $ARGUMENTS[0] (blank = use current sprint)

  • If an argument is given (e.g., /sprint-status 3), search production/sprints/ for a file matching sprint-03.md, sprint-3.md, or similar. Report which file was found.
  • If no argument is given, find the most recently modified file in production/sprints/ and treat it as the current sprint.
  • If production/sprints/ does not exist or is empty, report: "No sprint files found. Start a sprint with /sprint-plan new." Then stop.

Read the sprint file in full. Extract:

  • Sprint number and goal
  • Start date and end date
  • All story or task entries with their priority (Must Have / Should Have / Nice to Have), owner, and estimate

2. Calculate Days Remaining

Using today's date and the sprint end date from the sprint file, calculate:

  • Total sprint days (end minus start)
  • Days elapsed
  • Days remaining
  • Percentage of time consumed

If the sprint file does not include explicit dates, note "Sprint dates not found — burndown assessment skipped."


3. Scan Story Status

First: check for production/sprint-status.yaml.

If it exists, read it directly — it is the authoritative source of truth. Extract status for each story from the status field. No markdown scanning needed. Use its sprint, goal, start, end fields instead of re-parsing the sprint plan.

If sprint-status.yaml does not exist (legacy sprint or first-time setup), fall back to markdown scanning:

  1. If the entry references a story file path, check if the file exists. Read the file and scan for status markers: DONE, COMPLETE, IN PROGRESS, BLOCKED, NOT STARTED (case-insensitive).
  2. If the entry has no file path (inline task in the sprint plan), scan the sprint plan itself for status markers next to that entry.
  3. If no status marker is found, classify as NOT STARTED.
  4. If a file is referenced but does not exist, classify as MISSING and note it.

When using the fallback, add a note at the bottom of the output: "⚠ No sprint-status.yaml found — status inferred from markdown. Run /sprint-plan update to generate one."

Optionally (fast check only — do not do a deep scan): grep src/ for a directory or file name that matches the story's system slug to check for implementation evidence. This is a hint only, not a definitive status.

Stale Story Detection

After collecting status for all stories, check each IN PROGRESS story for staleness:

  • For each story that has a referenced file, read the file and look for a Last Updated: field in the frontmatter or header (e.g., Last Updated: 2026-04-01 or updated: 2026-04-01). Accept any reasonable date field name: Last Updated, Updated, last-updated, updated_at.
  • Calculate days since that date using today's date.
  • If the date is more than 4 days ago, flag the story as STALE. (4-day threshold accounts for weekends — a story last touched on Friday won't appear stale until Wednesday.)
  • If no date field is found in the story file, note "no timestamp — cannot check staleness."
  • If the story has no referenced file (inline task), note "inline task — cannot check staleness."

STALE stories are included in the output table and collected into an "Attention Needed" section (see Phase 5 output format).

Stale story escalation: If any IN PROGRESS story is flagged STALE (no progress in 4+ days), the burndown verdict is upgraded to at least At Risk — even if the completion percentage is within the normal On Track window. Record this escalation reason: "At Risk — [N] story(ies) with no progress in [N] days."


4. Burndown Assessment

Calculate:

  • Tasks complete (DONE or COMPLETE)
  • Tasks in progress (IN PROGRESS)
  • Tasks blocked (BLOCKED)
  • Tasks not started (NOT STARTED or MISSING)
  • Completion percentage: (complete / total) * 100

Assess burndown by comparing completion percentage to time consumed percentage:

  • On Track: completion % is within 10 points of time consumed % or ahead
  • At Risk: completion % is 10-25 points behind time consumed %
  • Behind: completion % is more than 25 points behind time consumed %

If dates are unavailable, skip the burndown assessment and report "On Track / At Risk / Behind: unknown — sprint dates not found."


5. Output

Keep the output concise. The story status table is mandatory — do not truncate it. Aim for under 50 lines total; omit the Emerging Risks section if nothing notable was found. Use this format:

## Sprint [N] Status — [Today's Date]
**Sprint Goal**: [from sprint plan]
**Days Remaining**: [N] of [total] ([% time consumed])

### Progress: [complete/total] tasks ([%])

| Story / Task         | Priority   | Status      | Owner   | Blocker        |
|----------------------|------------|-------------|---------|----------------|
| [title]              | Must Have  | DONE        | [owner] |                |
| [title]              | Must Have  | IN PROGRESS | [owner] |                |
| [title]              | Must Have  | BLOCKED     | [owner] | [brief reason] |
| [title]              | Should Have| NOT STARTED | [owner] |                |

### Attention Needed
| Story / Task         | Status      | Last Updated   | Days Stale | Note           |
|----------------------|-------------|----------------|------------|----------------|
| [title]              | IN PROGRESS | [date or N/A]  | [N days]   | [STALE / no timestamp — cannot check staleness / inline task — cannot check staleness] |

*(Omit this section entirely if no IN PROGRESS stories are stale or have timestamp concerns.)*

### Burndown: [On Track / At Risk / Behind]
[1-2 sentences. If behind: which Must Haves are at risk. If on track: confirm
and note any Should Haves the team could pull.]

### Must-Haves at Risk
[List any Must Have stories that are BLOCKED or NOT STARTED with less than
40% of sprint time remaining. If none, write "None."]

### Emerging Risks
[Any risks visible from the story scan: missing files, cascading blockers,
stories with no owner. If none, write "None identified."]

### Recommendation
[One concrete action, or "Sprint is on track — no action needed."]

6. Fast Escalation Rules

Apply these rules before outputting, and place the flag at the TOP of the output if triggered (above the status table):

Critical flag — if Must Have stories are BLOCKED or NOT STARTED and less than 40% of the sprint time remains:

SPRINT AT RISK: [N] Must Have stories are not complete with [X]% of sprint
time remaining. Recommend replanning with `/sprint-plan update`.

Completion flag — if all Must Have stories are DONE:

All Must Haves complete. Team can pull from Should Have backlog.

Missing stories flag — if any referenced story files do not exist:

NOTE: [N] story files referenced in the sprint plan are missing.
Run `/story-readiness sprint` to validate story file coverage.

Collaborative Protocol

This skill is read-only. It reports observed facts from files on disk.

  • It does not update the sprint plan
  • It does not change story status
  • It does not propose scope cuts (that is /sprint-plan update)
  • It makes at most one recommendation per run

For more detail on a specific story, the user can read the story file directly or run /story-readiness [path].

For sprint replanning, use /sprint-plan update. For end-of-sprint retrospective, use /retrospective.