retro

name	retro
description	Capture learnings from a completed story before moving on. Asks three questions one at a time and writes a retro draft pending graduation. Run immediately after after-coding.

Capture what was learned from this feature before the next one starts. Locate the completed feature, ask the engineer three questions one at a time, then write context/features/<feature-name>/retro.md as a draft pending graduation. Stage the draft and hand off.

Fail fast if after-coding was skipped

List directories under context/features/. A candidate is one that has execution-report.md but no retro.md yet. If no candidate exists, stop: "No completed feature found. Run /after-coding first, then return here." If multiple candidates exist, ask which feature the retro is for and wait.

Load feature context, not project rules

Read context/features/<feature-name>/execution-report.md (for the ticket reference and feature summary) and context/features/<feature-name>/implementation-guide.md (to recall what was planned). Do not read CLAUDE.md or conventions files — this retro is about this session's experience, not the project rules.

Ask three questions, one at a time

Ask each question, wait for a complete answer, acknowledge it briefly, then ask the next. Never batch.

Q1 — What did Claude consistently get wrong? A repeated mistake, a wrong default, something corrected more than once. Push for specifics: the code pattern, the file, the incorrect assumption. If the engineer says nothing, ask: "Was there anything you had to re-explain, any output you discarded and redid, or any default you had to override?"

Q2 — What prompt or instruction worked well? Something that produced correct output the first time, or that would be reused. If the engineer says nothing, ask: "Was there any moment where Claude got something right without correction? What did you say that led to that?"

Q3 — What was missing from the briefing? Project-specific knowledge not in CLAUDE.md, conventions.md, or the implementation guide that had to be explained inline. If the engineer says nothing, ask: "Was there any rule, pattern, or fact about the codebase you had to explain from scratch because it was not documented anywhere?"

Write the draft directly and stage it

Do not display the full retro.md content in chat. Write it to context/features/<feature-name>/retro.md, then run git add context/features/<feature-name>/retro.md.

The draft records: the engineer's answers to all three questions (verbatim, lightly edited for clarity — preserve specific examples), a PENDING GRADUATION status header, and blank graduation notes for graduate-retros to fill in.

Engineers never write to CLAUDE.md directly

The retro draft is staging, not graduation. The team lead runs /graduate-retros to review pending drafts and propose updates to CLAUDE.md and context/prompt-templates.md.

Hand off clearly

Report file produced and status (PENDING GRADUATION). Tell the engineer: commit the retro draft alongside the execution report and code changes. The team lead runs /graduate-retros to process pending drafts.