Retrospective
A comprehensive SWE workflow, encoded. Might be useful to you too.
npx -y skills add SWEStash/swe-workflow-skills --skill retrospectiveAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Facilitate sprint retros, project post-mortems, and incident post-mortems with actionable, owned improvements. Triggers: retrospective, retro, post-mortem, postmortem, lessons learned, what went wrong, what went well, incident review, blameless, action items, sprint review, after action review.
SKILL.md
6.1 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Retrospective
Facilitate structured reflection that produces concrete improvements. The goal is not to assign blame — it's to make the next iteration better than the last.
Three Formats
Sprint Retrospective
When: End of every sprint Duration: 30-60 minutes Scope: What happened this sprint Output: 2-3 action items with owners for next sprint
Project Post-Mortem
When: After a significant project or milestone completes Duration: 60-90 minutes Scope: The entire project from planning through delivery Output: Written document with learnings and recommendations
Incident Post-Mortem
When: After any production incident that impacted users Duration: 60 minutes Scope: The incident timeline, response, and systemic causes Output: Blameless post-mortem document with prevention actions
Workflow: Sprint Retrospective
Step 1: Gather Data
Collect information about the sprint before the meeting:
- Sprint velocity vs commitment
- Items completed vs carried over
- Incidents or bugs discovered
- Team sentiment (optional pulse survey)
Step 2: Facilitate Discussion
Use one of these formats:
Start/Stop/Continue:
- Start doing: What should we begin doing that we aren't?
- Stop doing: What's wasting time or causing problems?
- Continue doing: What's working well?
Went Well / Didn't Go Well / Action Items:
- What went well this sprint? (Celebrate wins)
- What didn't go well? (Identify problems without blame)
- What specific actions will we take to improve?
4Ls (Liked, Learned, Lacked, Longed for):
- What did we like about this sprint?
- What did we learn?
- What was lacking?
- What did we long for (wish we had)?
Step 3: Prioritize Action Items
Don't try to fix everything. Pick the top 2-3 improvements:
- Each action item gets an owner (one person, not "the team")
- Each action item gets a deadline (usually "by end of next sprint")
- Each action item is specific enough to verify completion
Step 4: Record and Follow Up
Save the retro notes. At the start of next sprint's retro, review the previous action items: were they completed?
Workflow: Project Post-Mortem
Step 1: Prepare the Review
Before the meeting, gather:
- Original project proposal, PRD, and estimates
- Actual timeline and effort vs estimated
- Key decisions made during the project and their outcomes
- Metrics: did the project hit its success criteria?
Step 2: Walk Through Key Questions
- Did we solve the right problem? Was the original problem statement accurate?
- Did we estimate well? Where were estimates off and why?
- What decisions would we make differently? (Technical, scope, team)
- What processes helped? (What to keep)
- What processes hindered? (What to change)
- What surprised us? (Unknowns that became knowns too late)
Step 3: Produce the Document
Use the template at templates/post-mortem.md. Share with the team and stakeholders.
Workflow: Incident Post-Mortem
Blameless Culture
The most important principle: incidents are caused by systems, not people. If a human made an error, the question is "why did the system allow that error to cause an outage?" not "who messed up?"
Step 1: Build the Timeline
Reconstruct a minute-by-minute timeline:
- When did the incident start?
- When was it detected? (By monitoring or by users?)
- When was the team alerted?
- What actions were taken and when?
- When was the incident resolved?
- When was the root cause confirmed?
Step 2: Identify Root Causes
Use the "5 Whys" technique to dig past symptoms:
Why did users see errors? → The API returned 500s.
Why did the API return 500s? → Database connections were exhausted.
Why were connections exhausted? → A query was holding connections open.
Why was a query holding connections? → A missing index caused full table scans.
Why was the index missing? → No index review process exists for migrations.
→ Root cause: No systematic review of database performance for new migrations.
Step 3: Define Prevention Actions
For each root cause, define an action that prevents recurrence:
| Action | Type | Owner | Deadline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add EXPLAIN ANALYZE check to migration CI | Prevention | [Name] | [Date] |
| Add connection pool monitoring alert | Detection | [Name] | [Date] |
| Document index guidelines for team | Process | [Name] | [Date] |
Action types:
- Prevention: Makes the incident impossible to recur
- Detection: Makes the incident detectable before user impact
- Mitigation: Reduces the blast radius if it happens again
- Process: Changes how the team works to reduce risk
Step 4: Produce the Post-Mortem
Use the template at templates/post-mortem.md. Publish internally — transparency builds trust and helps other teams learn.
Principles Applied
- Blameless over blame: Focus on systems, not individuals. "The deploy script didn't validate X" not "Dave forgot to check X."
- Action over discussion: Every retro must produce specific, owned action items. A retro without action items is just venting.
- KISS: 2-3 action items per retro, not 15. Fewer items done beats many items forgotten.
- Continuous improvement: Small improvements every sprint compound. A 5% improvement per sprint is 3x better in a year.
Cross-Skill References
incident-response— triggers a post-mortem; use this skill for the post-mortem workflowtechnical-debt-review— if retrospectives repeatedly surface the same maintenance pain, escalate to a full debt review
See references/facilitation-guide.md for retro formats, handling difficult conversations, and action item quality criteria.