| name | post-mortem |
| description | Wrap up completed work. Council validates the implementation, then extract and process learnings. Triggers: "post-mortem", "wrap up", "close epic", "what did we learn". |
| skill_api_version | 1 |
| metadata | {"tier":"judgment","dependencies":["council","beads"]} |
| context | {"window":"fork","intent":{"mode":"task"},"sections":{"exclude":["HISTORY"]},"intel_scope":"full"} |
Post-Mortem Skill
Purpose: Wrap up completed work — validate it shipped correctly, extract learnings, process the knowledge backlog, activate high-value insights, and retire stale knowledge.
Six phases:
- Council — Did we implement it correctly?
- Extract — What did we learn?
- Process Backlog — Score, deduplicate, and flag stale learnings
- Activate — Promote high-value learnings to MEMORY.md and constraints
- Retire — Archive stale and superseded learnings
- Harvest — Surface next work for the flywheel
Quick Start
/post-mortem
/post-mortem epic-123
/post-mortem --quick "insight"
/post-mortem --process-only
/post-mortem --skip-activate
/post-mortem --deep recent
/post-mortem --mixed epic-123
/post-mortem --explorers=2 epic-123
/post-mortem --debate epic-123
/post-mortem --skip-checkpoint-policy epic-123
Flags
| Flag | Default | Description |
|---|
--quick "text" | off | Quick-capture a single learning directly to .agents/learnings/ without running a full post-mortem. Formerly handled by /retro --quick. |
--process-only | off | Skip council and extraction (Phase 1-2). Run Phase 3-5 on the existing backlog only. |
--skip-activate | off | Extract and process learnings but do not write to MEMORY.md (skip Phase 4 promotions). |
--deep | off | 3 judges (default for post-mortem) |
--mixed | off | Cross-vendor (Claude + Codex) judges |
--explorers=N | off | Each judge spawns N explorers before judging |
--debate | off | Two-round adversarial review |
--skip-checkpoint-policy | off | Skip ratchet chain validation |
--skip-sweep | off | Skip pre-council deep audit sweep |
Quick Mode
Given /post-mortem --quick "insight text":
Quick Step 1: Generate Slug
Create a slug from the content: first meaningful words, lowercase, hyphens, max 50 chars.
Quick Step 2: Write Learning Directly
Write to: .agents/learnings/YYYY-MM-DD-quick-<slug>.md
---
type: learning
source: post-mortem-quick
date: YYYY-MM-DD
---
# Learning: <Short Title>
**Category**: <auto-classify: debugging|architecture|process|testing|security>
**Confidence**: medium
## What We Learned
<user's insight text>
## Source
Quick capture via `/post-mortem --quick`
This skips the full pipeline — writes directly to learnings, no council or backlog processing.
Quick Step 3: Confirm
Learned: <one-line summary>
Saved to: .agents/learnings/YYYY-MM-DD-quick-<slug>.md
For deeper reflection, use `/post-mortem` without --quick.
Done. Return immediately after confirmation.
Execution Steps
Pre-Flight Checks
Before proceeding, verify:
- Git repo exists:
git rev-parse --git-dir 2>/dev/null — if not, error: "Not in a git repository"
- Work was done:
git log --oneline -1 2>/dev/null — if empty, error: "No commits found. Run /implement first."
- Epic context: If epic ID provided, verify it has closed children. If 0 closed children, error: "No completed work to review."
If --process-only: Skip Pre-Flight Checks through Step 3. Jump directly to Phase 3: Process Backlog.
Step 0.4: Load Reference Documents (MANDATORY)
Before Step 0.5 and Step 2.5, load required reference docs into context using the Read tool:
REQUIRED_REFS=(
"skills/post-mortem/references/checkpoint-policy.md"
"skills/post-mortem/references/metadata-verification.md"
"skills/post-mortem/references/closure-integrity-audit.md"
)
For each reference file, use the Read tool to load its content and hold it in context for use in later steps. Do NOT just test file existence with [ -f ] -- actually read the content so it is available when Steps 0.5 and 2.5 need it.
If a reference file does not exist (Read returns an error), log a warning and add it as a checkpoint warning in the council context. Proceed only if the missing reference is intentionally deferred.
Step 0.5: Checkpoint-Policy Preflight (MANDATORY)
Read references/checkpoint-policy.md for the full checkpoint-policy preflight procedure. It validates the ratchet chain, checks artifact availability, and runs idempotency checks. BLOCK on prior FAIL verdicts; WARN on everything else.
Step 1: Identify Completed Work and Record Timing
Record the post-mortem start time for cycle-time tracking:
PM_START=$(date +%s)
If epic/issue ID provided: Use it directly.
If no ID: Find recently completed work:
bd list --status closed --since "7 days ago" 2>/dev/null | head -5
git log --oneline --since="7 days ago" | head -10
Step 2: Load the Original Plan/Spec
Before invoking council, load the original plan for comparison:
- If epic/issue ID provided:
bd show <id> to get the spec/description
- Search for plan doc:
ls .agents/plans/ | grep <target-keyword>
- Check git log:
git log --oneline | head -10 to find the relevant bead reference
If a plan is found, include it in the council packet's context.spec field:
{
"spec": {
"source": "bead na-0042",
"content": "<the original plan/spec text>"
}
}
Step 2.1: Load Compiled Prevention Context
Before council and retro synthesis, load compiled prevention outputs when they exist:
.agents/planning-rules/*.md
.agents/pre-mortem-checks/*.md
Use these compiled artifacts first, then fall back to .agents/findings/registry.jsonl only when compiled outputs are missing or incomplete. Carry matched finding IDs into the retro as Applied findings / Known risks applied context so post-mortem can judge whether the flywheel actually prevented rediscovery.
Step 2.2: Load Implementation Summary
Check for a crank-generated phase-2 summary:
PHASE2_SUMMARY=$(ls -t .agents/rpi/phase-2-summary-*-crank.md 2>/dev/null | head -1)
if [ -n "$PHASE2_SUMMARY" ]; then
echo "Phase-2 summary found: $PHASE2_SUMMARY"
fi
If available, use the phase-2 summary to understand what was implemented, how many waves ran, and which files were modified.
Step 2.3: Reconcile Plan vs Delivered Scope
Compare the original plan scope against what was actually delivered:
- Read the plan from
.agents/plans/ (most recent)
- Compare planned issues against closed issues (
bd children <epic-id>)
- Note any scope additions, removals, or modifications
- Include scope delta in the post-mortem findings
Step 2.4: Closure Integrity Audit (MANDATORY)
Read references/closure-integrity-audit.md for the full procedure. Mechanically verifies:
- Evidence precedence per child — every closed child resolves on the strongest available evidence in this order:
commit, then staged, then worktree
- Phantom bead detection — flags children with generic titles ("task") or empty descriptions
- Orphaned children — beads in
bd list but not linked to parent in bd show
- Multi-wave regression detection — for crank epics, checks if a later wave removed code added by an earlier wave
- Stretch goal audit — verifies deferred stretch goals have documented rationale
Include results in the council packet as context.closure_integrity. WARN on 1-2 findings, FAIL on 3+.
If a closure is evidence-only or closes before its proving commit exists, emit a proof artifact with bash skills/post-mortem/scripts/write-evidence-only-closure.sh and cite the durable tracked copy at .agents/releases/evidence-only-closures/<target-id>.json in the council packet. The writer also emits a local council copy at .agents/council/evidence-only-closures/<target-id>.json. The packet must record the selected evidence_mode plus repo-state detail that distinguishes staged files from broader worktree state so active-session audits stay mechanically replayable.
Step 2.5: Pre-Council Metadata Verification (MANDATORY)
Read references/metadata-verification.md for the full verification procedure. Mechanically checks: plan vs actual files, file existence in commits, cross-references in docs, and ASCII diagram integrity. Failures are included in the council packet as context.metadata_failures.
Step 2.6: Pre-Council Deep Audit Sweep
Skip if --quick or --skip-sweep.
Before council runs, dispatch a deep audit sweep to systematically discover issues across all changed files. This uses the same protocol as /vibe --deep — see the deep audit protocol in the vibe skill (skills/vibe/) for the full specification.
In summary:
- Identify all files in scope (from epic commits or recent changes)
- Chunk files into batches of 3-5 by line count (<=100 lines -> batch of 5, 101-300 -> batch of 3, >300 -> solo)
- Dispatch up to 8 Explore agents in parallel, each with a mandatory 8-category checklist per file (resource leaks, string safety, dead code, hardcoded values, edge cases, concurrency, error handling, HTTP/web security)
- Merge all explorer findings into a sweep manifest at
.agents/council/sweep-manifest.md
- Include sweep manifest in council packet — judges shift to adjudication mode (confirm/reject/reclassify sweep findings + add cross-cutting findings)
Why: Post-mortem council judges exhibit satisfaction bias when reviewing monolithic file sets — they stop at ~10 findings regardless of actual issue count. Per-file explorers with category checklists find 3x more issues, and the sweep manifest gives judges structured input to adjudicate rather than discover from scratch.
Skip conditions:
--quick flag -> skip (fast inline path)
--skip-sweep flag -> skip (old behavior: judges do pure discovery)
- No source files in scope -> skip (nothing to audit)
Step 3: Council Validates the Work
Run /council with the retrospective preset and always 3 judges:
/council --deep --preset=retrospective validate <epic-or-recent>
Default (3 judges with retrospective perspectives):
plan-compliance: What was planned vs what was delivered? What's missing? What was added?
tech-debt: What shortcuts were taken? What will bite us later? What needs cleanup?
learnings: What patterns emerged? What should be extracted as reusable knowledge?
Post-mortem always uses 3 judges (--deep) because completed work deserves thorough review.
Timeout: Post-mortem inherits council timeout settings. If judges time out,
the council report will note partial results. Post-mortem treats a partial council
report the same as a full report — the verdict stands with available judges.
The plan/spec content is injected into the council packet context so the plan-compliance judge can compare planned vs delivered.
With --quick (inline, no spawning):
/council --quick validate <epic-or-recent>
Single-agent structured review. Fast wrap-up without spawning.
With debate mode:
/post-mortem --debate epic-123
Enables adversarial two-round review for post-implementation validation. Use for high-stakes shipped work where missed findings have production consequences. See /council docs for full --debate details.
Advanced options (passed through to council):
--mixed — Cross-vendor (Claude + Codex) with retrospective perspectives
--preset=<name> — Override with different personas (e.g., --preset=ops for production readiness)
--explorers=N — Each judge spawns N explorers to investigate the implementation deeply before judging
--debate — Two-round adversarial review (judges critique each other's findings before final verdict)
Phase 2: Extract Learnings
Inline extraction of learnings from the completed work (formerly delegated to the retro skill).
Step EX.1: Gather Context
git log --oneline -20 --since="7 days ago"
bd children <epic-id> 2>/dev/null | head -20
ls -lt .agents/plans/ .agents/research/ 2>/dev/null | head -10
Read relevant artifacts: research documents, plan documents, commit messages, code changes. Use the Read tool and git commands to understand what was done.
If retrospecting an epic: Run the closure integrity quick-check from references/context-gathering.md (Phantom Bead Detection + Multi-Wave Regression Scan). Include any warnings in findings.
Step EX.2: Classify Learnings
Ask these questions:
What went well?
- What approaches worked?
- What was faster than expected?
- What should we do again?
What went wrong?
- What failed?
- What took longer than expected?
- What would we do differently?
What did we discover?
- New patterns found
- Codebase quirks learned
- Tool tips discovered
- Debugging insights
For each learning, capture:
- ID: L1, L2, L3...
- Category: debugging, architecture, process, testing, security
- What: The specific insight
- Why it matters: Impact on future work
- Confidence: high, medium, low
Step EX.3: Write Learnings
Write to: .agents/learnings/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>.md
---
id: learning-YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>
type: learning
date: YYYY-MM-DD
category: <category>
confidence: <high|medium|low>
---
# Learning: <Short Title>
## What We Learned
<1-2 sentences describing the insight>
## Why It Matters
<1 sentence on impact/value>
## Source
<What work this came from>
---
# Learning: <Next Title>
**ID**: L2
...
Step EX.4: Classify Learning Scope
For each learning extracted in Step EX.3, classify:
Question: "Does this learning reference specific files, packages, or architecture in THIS repo? Or is it a transferable pattern that helps any project?"
- Repo-specific -> Write to
.agents/learnings/ (existing behavior from Step EX.3). Use git rev-parse --show-toplevel to resolve repo root — never write relative to cwd.
- Cross-cutting/transferable -> Rewrite to remove repo-specific context (file paths, function names, package names), then:
- Write abstracted version to
~/.agents/learnings/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md (NOT local — one copy only)
- Run abstraction lint check:
file="<path-to-written-global-file>"
grep -iEn '(internal/|cmd/|\.go:|/pkg/|/src/|AGENTS\.md|CLAUDE\.md)' "$file" 2>/dev/null
grep -En '[A-Z][a-z]+[A-Z][a-z]+\.(go|py|ts|rs)' "$file" 2>/dev/null
grep -En '\./[a-z]+/' "$file" 2>/dev/null
If matches: WARN user with matched lines, ask to proceed or revise. Never block the write.
Note: Each learning goes to ONE location (local or global). No promoted_to needed — there's no local copy to mark when writing directly to global.
Example abstraction:
- Local: "Athena's validate package needs O_CREATE|O_EXCL for atomic claims because Zeus spawns concurrent workers"
- Global: "Use O_CREATE|O_EXCL for atomic file creation when multiple processes may race on the same path"
Step EX.5: Write Structured Findings to Registry
Before backlog processing, normalize reusable council findings into .agents/findings/registry.jsonl.
Use the tracked contract in docs/contracts/finding-registry.md:
- persist only reusable findings that should change future planning or review behavior
- require
dedup_key, provenance, pattern, detection_question, checklist_item, applicable_when, and confidence
applicable_when must use the controlled vocabulary from the contract
- append or merge by
dedup_key
- use the contract's temp-file-plus-rename atomic write rule
This registry is the v1 advisory prevention surface. It complements learnings and next-work; it does not replace them.
Step EX.6: Refresh Compiled Prevention Outputs
After the registry mutation, refresh compiled outputs immediately so the same session can benefit from the updated prevention set.
If hooks/finding-compiler.sh exists, run:
bash hooks/finding-compiler.sh --quiet 2>/dev/null || true
This promotes registry rows into .agents/findings/*.md, refreshes .agents/planning-rules/*.md and .agents/pre-mortem-checks/*.md, and rewrites draft constraint metadata under .agents/constraints/. Active enforcement still depends on the constraint index lifecycle and runtime hook support, but compilation itself is no longer deferred.
Phase 3: Process Backlog
Score, deduplicate, and flag stale learnings across the full backlog. This phase runs on ALL learnings, not just those extracted in Phase 2.
Read references/backlog-processing.md for detailed scoring formulas, deduplication logic, and staleness criteria.
Step BP.1: Load Last-Processed Marker
MARKER=".agents/ao/last-processed"
mkdir -p .agents/ao
if [ ! -f "$MARKER" ]; then
date -v-30d +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S 2>/dev/null || date -d "30 days ago" --iso-8601=seconds > "$MARKER"
fi
LAST_PROCESSED=$(cat "$MARKER")
Step BP.2: Scan Unprocessed Learnings
find .agents/learnings/ -name "*.md" -newer "$MARKER" -not -path "*/archive/*" -type f | sort
If zero files found: report "Backlog empty — no unprocessed learnings" and skip to Phase 4.
Step BP.3: Deduplicate
For each pair of unprocessed learnings:
- Extract
# Learning: title
- Normalize: lowercase, strip punctuation, collapse whitespace
- If two normalized titles share >= 80% word overlap, merge:
- Keep the file with highest confidence (high > medium > low); if tied, keep most recent
- Archive the duplicate with a
merged_into: pointer
Step BP.4: Score Each Learning
Compute composite score for each learning:
| Factor | Values | Points |
|---|
| Confidence | high=3, medium=2, low=1 | 1-3 |
| Citations | default=1, +1 per cite in .agents/ao/citations.jsonl | 1+ |
| Recency | <7d=3, <30d=2, else=1 | 1-3 |
Score = confidence + citations + recency
Step BP.5: Flag Stale
Learnings that are >30 days old AND have zero citations are flagged for retirement in Phase 5.
if [ "$DAYS_OLD" -gt 30 ] && [ "$CITE_COUNT" -eq 0 ]; then
echo "STALE: $LEARNING_FILE (${DAYS_OLD}d old, 0 citations)"
fi
Step BP.6: Report
Phase 3 (Process Backlog) Summary:
- N learnings scanned
- N duplicates merged
- N scored (range: X-Y)
- N flagged stale
Phase 4: Activate
Promote high-value learnings and feed downstream systems. Read references/activation-policy.md for detailed promotion thresholds and procedures.
If --skip-activate is set: Skip this phase entirely. Report "Phase 4 skipped (--skip-activate)."
Step ACT.1: Promote to MEMORY.md
Learnings with score >= 6 are promoted:
- Read the learning file
- Extract title and core insight
- Check MEMORY.md for duplicate entries (grep for key phrases)
- If no duplicate: append to
## Key Lessons in MEMORY.md
## Key Lessons
- **<Title>** — <one-line insight> (source: `.agents/learnings/<filename>`)
Important: Append only. Never overwrite MEMORY.md.
Step ACT.2: Re-Run the Finding Compiler Idempotently
If registry rows changed during this post-mortem, rerun the compiler before feeding next-work so downstream sessions read the freshest compiled prevention outputs:
bash hooks/finding-compiler.sh --quiet 2>/dev/null || true
Step ACT.3: Feed Next-Work
Actionable improvements identified during processing -> append one schema v1.3
batch entry to .agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl using the tracked contract in
../../.agents/rpi/next-work.schema.md
and the write procedure in
references/harvest-next-work.md:
mkdir -p .agents/rpi
ENTRY_TIMESTAMP="$(date -Iseconds)"
SOURCE_EPIC="${EPIC_ID:-recent}"
VALID_ITEMS_JSON="${VALID_ITEMS_JSON:-[]}"
printf '%s\n' "$(jq -cn \
--arg source_epic "$SOURCE_EPIC" \
--arg timestamp "$ENTRY_TIMESTAMP" \
--argjson items "$VALID_ITEMS_JSON" \
'{
source_epic: $source_epic,
timestamp: $timestamp,
items: $items,
consumed: false,
claim_status: "available",
claimed_by: null,
claimed_at: null,
consumed_by: null,
consumed_at: null
}'
)" >> .agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl
Step ACT.4: Update Marker
date -Iseconds > .agents/ao/last-processed
This must be the LAST action in Phase 4.
Step ACT.5: Report
Phase 4 (Activate) Summary:
- N promoted to MEMORY.md
- N duplicates merged
- N flagged for retirement
- N constraints compiled
- N improvements fed to next-work.jsonl
Phase 5: Retire Stale
Archive learnings that are no longer earning their keep.
Step RET.1: Archive Stale Learnings
Learnings flagged in Phase 3 (>30d old, zero citations):
mkdir -p .agents/learnings/archive
for f in <stale-files>; do
mv "$f" .agents/learnings/archive/
echo "Archived: $f (stale: >30d, 0 citations)"
done
Step RET.2: Archive Superseded Learnings
Learnings merged during Phase 3 deduplication were already archived with merged_into: pointers. Verify the pointers are valid:
for f in .agents/learnings/archive/*.md; do
[ -f "$f" ] || continue
MERGED_INTO=$(grep "^merged_into:" "$f" 2>/dev/null | awk '{print $2}')
if [ -n "$MERGED_INTO" ] && [ ! -f "$MERGED_INTO" ]; then
echo "WARN: $f points to missing file: $MERGED_INTO"
fi
done
Step RET.3: Clean MEMORY.md References
If any archived learning was previously promoted to MEMORY.md, remove those entries:
for f in <archived-files>; do
BASENAME=$(basename "$f")
if grep -q "$BASENAME" MEMORY.md 2>/dev/null; then
echo "WARN: MEMORY.md references archived learning: $BASENAME — consider removing"
fi
done
Note: Do not auto-delete MEMORY.md entries. WARN the user and let them decide.
Step RET.4: Report
Phase 5 (Retire) Summary:
- N stale learnings archived
- N superseded learnings archived
- N MEMORY.md references to review
Step 4: Write Post-Mortem Report
Write to: .agents/council/YYYY-MM-DD-post-mortem-<topic>.md
---
id: post-mortem-YYYY-MM-DD-<topic-slug>
type: post-mortem
date: YYYY-MM-DD
source: "[[.agents/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<plan-slug>]]"
---
# Post-Mortem: <Epic/Topic>
**Epic:** <epic-id or "recent">
**Duration:** <elapsed time from PM_START to now>
**Cycle-Time Trend:** <compare against prior post-mortems — is this faster or slower? Check .agents/council/ for prior post-mortem Duration values>
## Council Verdict: PASS / WARN / FAIL
| Judge | Verdict | Key Finding |
|-------|---------|-------------|
| Plan-Compliance | ... | ... |
| Tech-Debt | ... | ... |
| Learnings | ... | ... |
### Implementation Assessment
<council summary>
### Concerns
<any issues found>
## Learnings (from Phase 2)
### What Went Well
- ...
### What Was Hard
- ...
### Do Differently Next Time
- ...
### Patterns to Reuse
- ...
### Anti-Patterns to Avoid
- ...
### Footgun Entries (Required)
List discovered footguns — common mistakes or surprising behaviors that cost time:
| Footgun | Impact | Prevention |
|---------|--------|-----------|
| description | how it wasted time | how to prevent |
These entries are promoted to `.agents/learnings/` and injected into future worker prompts to prevent recurrence. Zero-cycle lag between discovery and prevention.
## Knowledge Lifecycle
### Backlog Processing (Phase 3)
- Scanned: N learnings
- Merged: N duplicates
- Flagged stale: N
### Activation (Phase 4)
- Promoted to MEMORY.md: N
- Constraints compiled: N
- Next-work items fed: N
### Retirement (Phase 5)
- Archived: N learnings
## Proactive Improvement Agenda
| # | Area | Improvement | Priority | Horizon | Effort | Evidence |
|---|------|-------------|----------|---------|--------|----------|
| 1 | repo / execution / ci-automation | ... | P0/P1/P2 | now/next-cycle/later | S/M/L | ... |
## Prior Findings Resolution Tracking
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Backlog entries analyzed | ... |
| Prior findings total | ... |
| Resolved findings | ... |
| Unresolved findings | ... |
| Resolution rate | ...% |
| Source Epic | Findings | Resolved | Unresolved | Resolution Rate |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ...% |
## Command-Surface Parity Checklist
| Command File | Run-path Covered by Test? | Evidence (file:line or test name) | Intentionally Uncovered? | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| cli/cmd/ao/<command>.go | yes/no | ... | yes/no | ... |
## Next Work
| # | Title | Type | Severity | Source | Target Repo |
|---|-------|------|----------|--------|-------------|
| 1 | <title> | tech-debt / improvement / pattern-fix / process-improvement | high / medium / low | council-finding / retro-learning / retro-pattern | <repo-name or *> |
### Recommended Next /rpi
/rpi "<highest-value improvement>"
## Status
[ ] CLOSED - Work complete, learnings captured
[ ] FOLLOW-UP - Issues need addressing (create new beads)
Step 4.5: Synthesize Proactive Improvement Agenda (MANDATORY)
After writing the post-mortem report, analyze extraction + council context and proactively propose improvements to repo quality and execution quality.
Read the extraction output (from Phase 2) and the council report (from Step 3). For each learning, ask:
- What process does this improve? (build, test, review, deploy, documentation, automation, etc.)
- What's the concrete change? (new check, new automation, workflow change, tooling improvement)
- Is it actionable in one RPI cycle? (if not, split into smaller pieces)
Coverage requirements:
- Include ALL improvements found (no cap).
- Cover all three surfaces:
repo (code/contracts/docs quality)
execution (planning/implementation/review workflow)
ci-automation (validation/tooling reliability)
- Include at least 1 quick win (small, low-risk, same-session viable).
Write process improvement items with type process-improvement (distinct from tech-debt or improvement). Each item must have:
title: imperative form, e.g. "Add pre-commit lint check"
area: which part of the development process to improve
description: 2-3 sentences describing the change and why retro evidence supports it
evidence: which retro finding or council finding motivates this
priority: P0 / P1 / P2
horizon: now / next-cycle / later
effort: S / M / L
These items feed directly into Step 5 (Harvest Next Work) alongside council findings. They are the flywheel's growth vector — each cycle makes the system smarter.
Write this into the post-mortem report under ## Proactive Improvement Agenda.
Example output:
## Proactive Improvement Agenda
| # | Area | Improvement | Priority | Horizon | Effort | Evidence |
|---|------|-------------|----------|---------|--------|----------|
| 1 | ci-automation | Add validation metadata requirement for Go tasks | P0 | now | S | Workers shipped untested code when metadata didn't require `go test` |
| 2 | execution | Add consistency-check finding category in review | P1 | next-cycle | M | Partial refactoring left stale references undetected |
Step 4.6: Prior-Findings Resolution Tracking (MANDATORY)
After Step 4.5, compute and include prior-findings resolution tracking from .agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl. Read references/harvest-next-work.md for the jq queries that compute totals and per-source resolution rates. Write results into ## Prior Findings Resolution Tracking in the post-mortem report.
Step 4.7: Command-Surface Parity Gate (MANDATORY)
Before marking post-mortem complete, enforce command-surface parity for modified CLI commands:
- Identify modified command files under
cli/cmd/ao/ from the reviewed scope.
- For each file, record at least one tested run-path (unit/integration/e2e) in
## Command-Surface Parity Checklist.
- Any intentionally uncovered command family must be explicitly listed with a reason and follow-up item.
If any modified command file is missing both coverage evidence and an intentional-uncovered rationale, post-mortem cannot be marked complete.
Step 5: Harvest Next Work
Scan the council report and extracted learnings for actionable follow-up items:
- Council findings: Extract tech debt, warnings, and improvement suggestions from the council report (items with severity "significant" or "critical" that weren't addressed in this epic)
- Retro patterns: Extract recurring patterns from learnings that warrant dedicated RPIs (items from "Do Differently Next Time" and "Anti-Patterns to Avoid")
- Process improvements: Include all items from Step 4.5 (type:
process-improvement). These are the flywheel's growth vector — each cycle makes development more effective.
- Footgun entries (REQUIRED): Extract platform-specific gotchas, surprising API behaviors, or silent-failure modes discovered during implementation. Each must include: trigger condition, observable symptom, and fix. Write as type
pattern-fix with source retro-learning. If a footgun was discovered this cycle, it must appear in this harvest — do not defer.
- Write
## Next Work section to the post-mortem report:
## Next Work
| # | Title | Type | Severity | Source | Target Repo |
|---|-------|------|----------|--------|-------------|
| 1 | <title> | tech-debt / improvement / pattern-fix / process-improvement | high / medium / low | council-finding / retro-learning / retro-pattern | <repo-name or *> |
-
SCHEMA VALIDATION (MANDATORY): Before writing, validate each harvested item against the tracked contract in .agents/rpi/next-work.schema.md. Read references/harvest-next-work.md for the validation function and write procedure. Drop invalid items; do NOT block the entire harvest.
-
Write to next-work.jsonl (canonical path: .agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl). Read references/harvest-next-work.md for the write procedure (target_repo assignment, claim/finalize lifecycle, JSONL format, required fields).
-
Do NOT auto-create bd issues. Report the items and suggest: "Run /rpi --spawn-next to create an epic from these items."
If no actionable items found, write: "No follow-up items identified. Flywheel stable."
Step 6: Feed the Knowledge Flywheel
Post-mortem automatically feeds learnings into the flywheel:
if command -v ao &>/dev/null; then
ao forge markdown .agents/learnings/*.md 2>/dev/null
echo "Learnings indexed in knowledge flywheel"
ao temper validate --min-feedback 0 .agents/learnings/YYYY-MM-DD-*.md 2>/dev/null || true
echo "Artifacts validated for tempering"
ao session close 2>/dev/null || true
ao flywheel close-loop --quiet 2>/dev/null || true
echo "Session closed, flywheel loop triggered"
else
mkdir -p .agents/ao
if [ -f .agents/ao/citations.jsonl ]; then
echo "Processing citation feedback (ao-free fallback)..."
while IFS= read -r line; do
CITED_FILE=$(echo "$line" | grep -o '"learning_file":"[^"]*"' | cut -d'"' -f4)
if [ -f "$CITED_FILE" ]; then
echo "Cited: $CITED_FILE"
fi
done < .agents/ao/citations.jsonl
fi
EPIC_ID="<epic-id>"
echo "{\"epic\": \"$EPIC_ID\", \"verdict\": \"<council-verdict>\", \"cycle_time_minutes\": 0, \"timestamp\": \"$(date -Iseconds)\"}" >> .agents/ao/outcomes.jsonl
echo "Flywheel fed locally (ao CLI not available — learnings searchable via grep)"
fi
Step 7: Report to User
Tell the user:
- Council verdict on implementation
- Key learnings
- Any follow-up items
- Location of post-mortem report
- Knowledge flywheel status
- Suggested next
/rpi command from the harvested ## Next Work section (ALWAYS — this is how the flywheel spins itself)
- ALL proactive improvements, organized by priority (highlight one quick win)
- Knowledge lifecycle summary (Phase 3-5 stats)
The next /rpi suggestion is MANDATORY, not opt-in. After every post-mortem, present the highest-severity harvested item as a ready-to-copy command:
## Flywheel: Next Cycle
Based on this post-mortem, the highest-priority follow-up is:
> **<title>** (<type>, <severity>)
> <1-line description>
Ready to run:
/rpi ""
Or see all N harvested items in `.agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl`.
If no items were harvested, write: "Flywheel stable — no follow-up items identified."
Integration with Workflow
/plan epic-123
|
v
/pre-mortem (council on plan)
|
v
/implement
|
v
/vibe (council on code)
|
v
Ship it
|
v
/post-mortem <-- You are here
|
|-- Phase 1: Council validates implementation
|-- Phase 2: Extract learnings (inline)
|-- Phase 3: Process backlog (score, dedup, flag stale)
|-- Phase 4: Activate (promote to MEMORY.md, compile constraints)
|-- Phase 5: Retire stale learnings
|-- Phase 6: Harvest next work
|-- Suggest next /rpi --------------------+
|
+----------------------------------------+
| (flywheel: learnings become next work)
v
/rpi "<highest-priority enhancement>"
Examples
Wrap Up Recent Work
User says: /post-mortem
What happens:
- Agent scans recent commits (last 7 days)
- Runs
/council --deep --preset=retrospective validate recent
- 3 judges (plan-compliance, tech-debt, learnings) review
- Extracts learnings inline (Phase 2: context gathering, classification, writing)
- Processes backlog (Phase 3: scores, deduplicates, flags stale)
- Activates high-value learnings (Phase 4: promotes to MEMORY.md)
- Retires stale knowledge (Phase 5)
- Synthesizes process improvement proposals
- Harvests next-work items to
.agents/rpi/next-work.jsonl
- Feeds learnings to knowledge flywheel via
ao forge
Result: Post-mortem report with learnings, tech debt identified, knowledge lifecycle stats, and suggested next /rpi command.
Wrap Up Specific Epic
User says: /post-mortem ag-5k2
What happens:
- Agent loads original plan from
bd show ag-5k2
- Council reviews implementation vs plan
- Phase 2 captures what went well and what was hard
- Phase 3 processes full backlog (not just this epic's learnings)
- Phase 4 promotes 2 learnings to MEMORY.md, compiles 1 constraint
- Process improvements identified (e.g., "Add pre-commit lint check")
- Next-work items harvested and written to JSONL
Result: Epic-specific post-mortem with 3 harvested follow-up items, 2 promoted learnings, 1 new constraint.
Quick Capture
User says: /post-mortem --quick "always use O_CREATE|O_EXCL for atomic file creation when racing"
What happens:
- Agent generates slug:
atomic-file-creation-racing
- Writes to
.agents/learnings/2026-03-03-quick-atomic-file-creation-racing.md
- Confirms and returns immediately
Result: Learning captured in 5 seconds, no council or backlog processing.
Process-Only Mode
User says: /post-mortem --process-only
What happens:
- Skips council and extraction entirely
- Phase 3: Scans 47 learnings, merges 3 duplicates, flags 8 stale
- Phase 4: Promotes 5 high-scoring learnings to MEMORY.md, compiles 2 constraints
- Phase 5: Archives 8 stale learnings
Result: Knowledge backlog cleaned up without running a new post-mortem.
Cross-Vendor Review
User says: /post-mortem --mixed ag-3b7
What happens:
- Agent runs 3 Claude + 3 Codex judges
- Cross-vendor perspectives catch edge cases
- Verdict: WARN (missing error handling in 2 files)
- Phase 2-5 process learnings through the full lifecycle
- Harvests 1 tech-debt item
Result: Higher confidence validation with cross-vendor review before closing epic.
Troubleshooting
| Problem | Cause | Solution |
|---|
| Council times out | Epic too large or too many files changed | Split post-mortem into smaller reviews or increase timeout |
| No next-work items harvested | Council found no tech debt or improvements | Flywheel stable — write entry with empty items array to next-work.jsonl |
| Schema validation failed | Harvested item missing required field or has invalid enum value | Drop invalid item, log error, proceed with valid items only |
| Checkpoint-policy preflight blocks | Prior FAIL verdict in ratchet chain without fix | Resolve prior failure (fix + re-vibe) or skip checkpoint-policy via --skip-checkpoint-policy |
| Metadata verification fails | Plan vs actual files mismatch or missing cross-references | Include failures in council packet as context.metadata_failures — judges assess severity |
| Phase 3 finds zero learnings | last-processed marker is very recent or no learnings exist | Reset marker: date -v-30d +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S > .agents/ao/last-processed |
| Phase 4 promotion duplicates | MEMORY.md already has the insight | Grep-based dedup should catch this; if not, manually deduplicate MEMORY.md |
| Phase 5 archives too aggressively | 30-day window too short for slow-cadence projects | Adjust the staleness threshold in references/backlog-processing.md |
See Also
skills/council/SKILL.md — Multi-model validation council
skills/vibe/SKILL.md — Council validates code (/vibe after coding)
skills/pre-mortem/SKILL.md — Council validates plans (before implementation)
Reference Documents