02-definition-of-done

name	02-definition-of-done
description	Use when defining observable completion criteria for code, tests, documentation, review, and deployment readiness. Use definition-of-ready for pre-sprint admission and formal-review-gates for lifecycle approvals.
metadata	{"portable":true,"compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]}

Definition of Done Skill

Use When

• Use when defining observable completion criteria for code, tests, documentation, review, and deployment readiness. Use definition-of-ready for pre-sprint admission and formal-review-gates for lifecycle approvals.

Do Not Use When

• Do not use when a more specific upstream or downstream skill owns the task, or when the required project context has not been prepared.
• Do not use this skill to fabricate missing project facts, legal conclusions, test results, approvals, or certification claims.

Required Inputs

Artefact	Source or provider	Required?	Missing-input behaviour
Engineering standards; test strategy; documentation obligations; review policy; deployment and rollback controls; applicable compliance gates	Engineering, QA, operations, security, and product owners	Yes	Stop dependent work; name the missing item, owner, and decision impact. A review check remains not assessed.
Scope, audience, baseline/version, and accountable decision owner	Requester or project context	Yes	Ask for or record the gap; do not infer authority or scope.

Capability and permission boundaries

Default to read-only. Read and search access to the supplied artefacts are required. Editing is limited to an explicitly authorised requested draft or project files. Execute validation only when authorised; publishing, signature, certification, production mutation, destructive action, spending, and risk acceptance require explicit authority.

Degraded Mode

When files, tools, network, rendering, fonts, execution, or evidence are unavailable, return the narrowest useful qualified draft or finding set. Name every unavailable check and its consequence; an unassessed check is never a pass. Preserve evidence already gathered and provide the exact next verification step.

Decision Rules

Condition	Action	Failure or risk avoided
A criterion lacks an observable test oracle	Rewrite it before adopting the checklist	Subjective gate decisions
Evidence satisfies every mandatory criterion	Record the item as ready or done, as applicable	Premature admission or completion

Workflow

1. Confirm the requested artefact, audience, scope, decision owner, and applicable baseline or version. Work read-only by default; source mutation, publication, signature, certification, production change, or risk acceptance requires explicit authority.
2. Inspect every required input and record missing, stale, conflicting, or inaccessible evidence. Stop claims that depend on an unresolved required input.
3. Apply the Decision Rules, then execute the existing Core Instructions below in order; preserve project terminology and trace each material statement to its source.
4. Test the draft against the output acceptance conditions and domain quality standards. If a check cannot run, mark it not assessed and never convert it into a pass.
5. On failure, recover by preserving completed evidence, identifying the narrowest corrective action and owner, and rerunning only the affected checks before handoff.
6. Produce the named artefact and evidence record; publish, sign, certify, mutate production, or accept risk only under explicit authority.

Outputs

Artefact	Consumer	Observable acceptance condition
Definition of Done	Product owner and delivery team	Every mandatory criterion has an observable oracle and evidence location; increment-level and release-level criteria are distinguished.
Gap and decision record	Accountable owner and downstream reviewer	Every gap has status, impact, owner, next action, and no unsupported pass or approval.

Evidence Produced

Evidence	Contents	Acceptance condition
Definition of Done evidence record	Source identifiers, scope/version, decisions, checks, exceptions, and approval state	A reviewer can reproduce each material conclusion from named sources.
Validation record	Check, result (pass, fail, or not assessed), evidence location, date, and actor	No required check is omitted or silently treated as passed.

Quality Standards

• Keep outputs grounded in source context, traceable to stated standards, and specific enough to review or verify.
• Use deterministic acceptance conditions and preserve traceability from source to decision and output.
• Separate facts, inferences, assumptions, and approvals; never present one as another.
• Apply 28-anti-ai-slop during authoring and 29-ai-slop-audit at major checkpoints and release.

Anti-Patterns

• Producing Definition of Done from assumptions instead of named project sources. Fix: Cite the source or mark the item unverified.
• Treating a missing or inaccessible check as passed. Fix: Mark it not assessed, state impact, and block dependent claims.
• Using vague gates such as adequate, secure, or user-friendly. Fix: Replace each with an observable criterion, threshold, and evidence source.
• Copying a generic template without product, control, role, version, or jurisdiction detail. Fix: Ground every section in the supplied context and remove unused boilerplate.
• Publishing, signing, certifying, changing production, or accepting risk without authority. Fix: Prepare a draft and route the decision to the accountable owner.
• Listing evidence without provenance or an acceptance result. Fix: Record source, period, integrity check, mapping, and pass/fail/not-assessed status.

Worked Example

Example: if a criterion lacks an observable test oracle, rewrite it before adopting the checklist. Record the evidence and result in the validation record; this avoids subjective gate decisions.

References

• Generation logic: load when creating the complete artefact.
• Skill notes: consult for local examples and invocation context.
• Repository operating rules: apply the engine's routing, evidence, and release gates.

SaaS mode: if the project is a multi-tenant SaaS, apply references/saas-dod-addendum.md in addition to the generic steps below.

Overview

This skill produces a comprehensive Definition of Done (DoD) checklist that establishes the quality bar for increments. It defines criteria across code quality, testing, documentation, review, and deployment readiness to ensure every product backlog item meets a consistent, verifiable standard before it can be considered complete. The output conforms to the Scrum Guide.

When to Use This Skill

• When establishing or revising the team's quality gate for "done" increments.
• After quality_standards.md is present in projects/<ProjectName>/_context/ with project-specific quality requirements.
• When tech_stack.md is present in projects/<ProjectName>/_context/ to tailor criteria to the technology platform.
• Before sprint planning to ensure the team has a shared DoD reference.

Quick Reference

Attribute	Value
Inputs	projects/<ProjectName>/_context/quality_standards.md, projects/<ProjectName>/_context/tech_stack.md
Output	projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/Definition_of_Done.md
Standard	Scrum Guide
Time	10-15 minutes

Input Files

File	Location	Required	Purpose
quality_standards.md	projects/<ProjectName>/_context/quality_standards.md	Yes	Project quality requirements, coding standards, coverage targets
tech_stack.md	projects/<ProjectName>/_context/tech_stack.md	No	Technology choices to tailor criteria (linters, test frameworks, CI/CD tools)

Output Files

File	Location	Description
Definition_of_Done.md	projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/Definition_of_Done.md	Complete DoD checklist with item-level, increment-level, and release-level criteria

Core Instructions

Follow these eight steps in order. Halt and notify the user if a required input file is missing.

Step 1: Read Context Files

Read quality_standards.md from projects/<ProjectName>/_context/. Optionally read tech_stack.md from projects/<ProjectName>/_context/. Log the absolute path of each file read. Halt if the required file is missing.

Step 2: Define Code Quality Criteria

Generate code quality checklist items that SHALL:

• Require code to compile and build without errors or warnings.
• Require adherence to the project coding standard defined in quality_standards.md.
• Require static analysis or linting to pass with zero violations.
• Require no known security vulnerabilities introduced.

Step 3: Define Testing Criteria

Generate testing checklist items that SHALL:

• Require unit tests written and passing for all new and modified code.
• Require code coverage to meet or exceed the threshold in quality_standards.md.
• Require integration tests passing for affected interfaces.
• Require no regression in existing test suites.
• Require edge cases and error paths tested.

Step 4: Define Documentation Criteria

Generate documentation checklist items that SHALL:

• Require inline code comments for non-obvious logic.
• Require API documentation updated for new or changed endpoints.
• Require user-facing documentation updated if behavior changes.
• Require changelog entry added for the increment.

Step 5: Define Review Criteria

Generate review checklist items that SHALL:

• Require peer code review completed and approved.
• Require all review comments addressed or explicitly deferred with rationale.
• Require design review for architectural changes.
• Require product owner acceptance of acceptance criteria.

Step 6: Define Deployment Criteria

Generate deployment readiness checklist items that SHALL:

• Require CI/CD pipeline passing all stages (build, test, scan).
• Require deployment to a staging environment verified.
• Require rollback procedure documented or confirmed.
• Require configuration changes documented per environment.

Step 7: Define Increment-Level and Release-Level DoD

Generate higher-level DoD criteria:

• Increment-level: all selected backlog items meet item-level DoD, sprint goal validated, no critical defects open.
• Release-level: all increments meet increment-level DoD, release notes complete, performance benchmarks met, stakeholder sign-off obtained.

Step 8: Assemble and Write Output

Assemble all criteria into the final checklist document. Write the completed document to projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/Definition_of_Done.md. Log completion and total count of checklist items.

Output Format Specification

The generated Definition_of_Done.md SHALL contain these sections in order:

1. Document Header -- project name, date, version, standards reference
2. Code Quality Criteria -- build, standards, static analysis, security
3. Testing Criteria -- unit, integration, coverage, regression, edge cases
4. Documentation Criteria -- comments, API docs, user docs, changelog
5. Review Criteria -- code review, design review, PO acceptance
6. Deployment Criteria -- CI/CD, staging verification, rollback, configuration
7. Increment-Level DoD -- aggregate criteria for sprint increments
8. Release-Level DoD -- aggregate criteria for production releases

Common Pitfalls

• Vague criteria like "code is clean" -- every criterion SHALL be verifiable with a pass/fail outcome.
• Missing coverage thresholds -- testing criteria SHALL reference the specific percentage from quality_standards.md.
• No distinction between item, increment, and release levels -- the DoD SHALL define criteria at all three levels.
• Deployment readiness omitted -- the DoD SHALL include CI/CD and staging verification criteria.
• Criteria not tailored to the tech stack -- use tech_stack.md to reference specific tools and frameworks.

Verification Checklist

1. Definition_of_Done.md exists in projects/<ProjectName>/<phase>/<document>/ with all eight sections populated.
2. Every criterion is verifiable with a clear pass/fail outcome.
3. Testing criteria reference specific coverage thresholds from quality_standards.md.
4. Code quality criteria reference the project coding standard.
5. Deployment criteria include CI/CD pipeline and staging verification.
6. Increment-level and release-level DoD criteria are present and distinct.
7. All criteria are stated using "SHALL" language for mandatory requirements.

Integration

Direction	Skill	Relationship
Upstream	Project context (quality_standards.md)	Consumes quality thresholds and coding standards
Lateral	01-sprint-planning	Sprint plan references DoD artifact
Lateral	03-definition-of-ready	DoR and DoD form complementary quality gates
Downstream	Phase 05 (test planning)	DoD testing criteria inform test plan scope

Standards Compliance

• Scrum Guide -- Governs the Definition of Done as a formal description of the state of the Increment when it meets quality measures.

Resources

• logic.prompt -- Executable prompt containing the step-by-step DoD generation logic.
• README.md -- Quick-start guide for this skill.