Menu
Gets Claude to think about what went well and badly in a session with an eye on future improvements or lessons for the user.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Merge the base branch into the current branch. Do the merge and resolve the safe parts first, then let a cheap signal decide how deep to look. Go past textual conflicts to semantic breaks, and past those to design consistency. When the base carries a refactor or redesign, bring the current branch into line with it (with the user's consent).
Provides Apex development workflow including static analysis and testing steps. Use before writing Apex classes or triggers
Access Salesforce Apex classes and schema objects. Use BEFORE writing Apex code to check what frameworks, utilities, or patterns are already available (e.g., trigger frameworks, selector patterns, service classes). Also use when you need to know object fields, System class methods, API signatures. Check this when asked to create triggers, services, or any new Apex to see if there's an existing framework to follow.
Use before writing Lightning Web Components.
| name | claude-retrospective |
| description | Gets Claude to think about what went well and badly in a session with an eye on future improvements or lessons for the user. |
| trigger | Use when the user asks for a retrospective,retro, or feedback on the session |
Look back at what happened in the current session. Provide feedback to the user on where you struggled, and what could help you to do better next time. For example, if something took more steps than you expected, or you had wrong-turns, or the user had to keep correcting, these are interesting.
If suitable, suggest improvements like defining a skill, writing information into markdown files for project context, using different tools, updating CLAUDE.md.
Give them feedback, too. Could they have given more helpful direction? Did they explain the problem correctly?
You can highlight positives too, but don't be sycophantic.
Wherever possible, give actionable advice.
Only interesting feedback. A short retro is better than fluff.
Give your feedback in sections/tables so that it's easy to understand and scan.
