用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/UitbreidenOS/UitKit --skill pm-sprint-review命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
Guidelines and instructions for Agent execution state rollback rules
Guidelines and instructions for Agent execution step counters limits
Guidelines and instructions for Agent execution timeout limits setups
正在显示 SKILL.md
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | pm-sprint-review |
| description | Sprint review: velocity, shipped vs planned, blockers, learnings, next sprint priorities |
/user-story-writer for story creation/product-roadmap/product-analytics or /ux-researcherRun a sprint review for [TEAM NAME] — Sprint [N], [DATES].
Sprint goal: [what was the stated goal for this sprint]
Sprint duration: [1 / 2 weeks]
Team: [N engineers, N designers, N QA]
Velocity context: average velocity last 3 sprints: [N story points]
Sprint data (paste your ticket list or summary):
Planned tickets: [list with story points and status: done / partial / not started / blocked]
Unplanned work added mid-sprint: [list]
Total planned points: [X] | Total shipped: [X] | Velocity this sprint: [X]
Produce:
## 1. Sprint goal outcome
Did we hit the sprint goal? [Yes / Partial / No]
One-sentence verdict: what was accomplished in plain English.
## 2. Shipped vs. planned (table)
| Feature / Story | Points | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ticket] | [X] | Done / Partial / Slipped | [any note] |
## 3. What slipped and why
For each unfinished item: why? (underestimated / blocked / scope crept / deprioritised mid-sprint)
Root cause pattern: is there a single theme? (e.g., "3 of 4 slips were blocked by external API changes")
## 4. Unplanned work analysis
How much unplanned work was added? Was it justified?
Rule: unplanned work > 20% of sprint capacity indicates a planning or communication problem.
## 5. Velocity trend
3-sprint velocity trend: [Sprint N-2: X] [Sprint N-1: X] [Sprint N: X]
Is velocity improving, stable, or declining? What's driving it?
## 6. Retrospective highlights
What went well (top 2): specific, not generic
What didn't (top 2 with root cause): honest, with owner
One action for next sprint: a single, concrete process change
## 7. Next sprint priorities
Based on what slipped and what's still in the queue — recommended top 5 items for next sprint.
Analyse velocity for [TEAM] over the last [N] sprints.
Sprint data:
Sprint 1: planned [X] pts, delivered [X] pts, sprint goal: [met/missed]
Sprint 2: planned [X] pts, delivered [X] pts, sprint goal: [met/missed]
Sprint 3: planned [X] pts, delivered [X] pts, sprint goal: [met/missed]
[...]
Diagnose:
1. Average velocity: [X pts]
2. Predictability: what is the standard deviation? High deviation = planning problem
3. Pattern: is the team consistently over-committing? Under-delivering on specific types of work?
4. Sprint goal hit rate: [X / N sprints] — if below 70%, planning process needs fixing
5. Recommended capacity for next sprint based on trailing 3-sprint average (not the optimistic best)
Rule: use 80% of trailing average velocity as realistic next sprint capacity. Leave 20% for unplanned work, bugs, and meetings.
Recommendation: should we adjust our sprint length, team size, or planning process?
Facilitate a sprint retrospective for Sprint [N].
Format: [synchronous / async]
Team: [N people, roles]
Sprint outcome: [goal met / partial / missed]
Known hot topics: [any tensions or recurring issues to address]
Retrospective structure:
1. WHAT WENT WELL (10 min)
Prompt: "What would you do the same next sprint without hesitation?"
Good signal: specificity. If people say "communication was good" ask "give me one example where it was specifically good."
Capture: top 2-3 themes with examples.
2. WHAT DIDN'T (10 min)
Prompt: "What slowed us down, frustrated you, or you'd change if you could redo the sprint?"
Rules:
- No blaming individuals — blame processes and systems
- "The process of doing X was slow" not "Jane was slow at X"
- Every issue gets a severity: would-be-nice-to-fix vs. this-is-causing-real-damage
3. ROOT CAUSE DRILL (10 min)
For the top 2 "what didn't" items: apply 5 whys
Example:
Issue: "3 tickets slipped because we were blocked on backend API"
Why? → API wasn't ready when frontend needed it
Why? → API scope wasn't agreed before sprint started
Why? → Discovery was happening in parallel with implementation
Why? → We don't have a "definition of ready" for frontend-dependent work
Root cause: we start frontend work before backend contract is finalised
Fix: add "API contract approved" as part of definition of ready for all frontend tickets
4. ACTION ITEMS (10 min)
Rule: maximum 2 action items per retro. More than 2 and none get done.
Format: [WHAT] will be done by [WHO] before [DATE]
Example: "Jordan will draft a definition of ready checklist and share in Slack by next Monday"
Generate the retro structure and facilitate each section with the data I provide.
Write the sprint summary email/doc for [AUDIENCE].
Audience: [leadership / investors / other teams / full company]
Sprint: [N] | Dates: [start-end]
Sprint goal: [state it]
Tone rules:
- Leadership / investors: 3 paragraphs max, lead with outcome, data-backed, no jargon
- Full company: celebrate wins with names, explain slips without blame, set expectations
- Other teams: what shipped that affects them, what's coming next, any asks
Template for leadership summary:
Sprint [N] shipped [X story points] of [Y planned], [met / partially met / missed] the sprint goal of "[goal]".
Key deliverables shipped: [2-4 bullets — specific feature names, not generic descriptions]
[Feature]: [what it does, which customers asked for it or it unblocks]
[Feature]: [...]
What slipped: [1-2 sentences — what and why, no spin]
Next sprint priority: [the most important thing shipping in Sprint N+1 and why it matters]
Generate the summary for my audience with my sprint data.
Plan Sprint [N+1] based on this sprint's review.
Capacity:
- Team: [N engineers, N designers]
- Sprint days: [10 / 5 working days]
- Holidays or PTO: [list any absences]
- Expected capacity: [N% of normal — e.g., 80% due to 2 PTO days]
Backlog items to consider:
[Paste top 10-15 candidate items with story point estimates]
Constraints:
- Slipped from Sprint N (must carry forward): [list]
- Committed deliverables (external dependencies, customer promises): [list]
- Nice-to-have (can drop if capacity tight): [list]
Sprint goal candidates:
Option A: [goal] — rationale
Option B: [goal] — rationale
Option C: [goal] — rationale
Using trailing 3-sprint velocity of [X pts] and 80% capacity rule, recommend:
1. The sprint goal (which option, and why)
2. Exactly which items to commit to in this sprint
3. What to leave in the backlog
4. Risk: any items in this plan that are likely to slip, and why
User: Sprint 23, 2-week sprint. Goal: "Launch CSV export so enterprise users can download their data." Team of 4 engineers, 1 designer. Planned 42 pts. Delivered: CSV export (done, 13 pts), bulk selection UI (done, 8 pts), API rate limiting (partial — 5/8 pts shipped), 3 bug fixes (done, 7 pts), new onboarding flow (not started, 14 pts, reason: design not finalised). Sprint 22 velocity: 38. Sprint 21: 40.
Output:
# Sprint 23 Review — Week Ending June 6
## Sprint Goal Outcome
PARTIAL — We shipped the headline feature (CSV export) but the onboarding flow didn't start due to design not being finalised before sprint kickoff. The core goal for enterprise customers was achieved.
## Shipped vs. Planned
| Item | Points | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| CSV export | 13 | Done | Sprint goal met |
| Bulk selection UI | 8 | Done | Enables CSV export UX |
| API rate limiting | 8 | Partial (5 shipped) | Edge case handling still open |
| Bug fixes (3) | 7 | Done | |
| New onboarding flow | 14 | Not started | Design not finalised at sprint start |
| **Total** | **50** | **33 shipped** | **66% completion rate** |
## What Slipped and Why
Onboarding flow (14 pts): design wasn't finalised before sprint planning. This is not a sprint execution problem — it's a process problem. The team committed to work that wasn't ready.
Root cause: we don't have a "definition of ready" — tickets entered sprint planning without design sign-off.
API rate limiting (3 pts remaining): underestimated edge cases. Not a systemic issue.
## Unplanned Work
None added mid-sprint. Good discipline this sprint.
## Velocity Trend
Sprint 21: 40 pts | Sprint 22: 38 pts | Sprint 23: 33 pts
Velocity declining. The 14 pts of unstarted work masks a real capacity issue —
the team is not getting below-the-line design readiness before committing.
## Retrospective Highlights
Went well:
1. CSV export shipped on time, no rework — good upfront scoping by the engineering lead.
2. Bug fix batch was effective — 3 bugs closed in one focused session.
Didn't go well:
1. Onboarding flow committed without design readiness. Wasted the sprint planning discussion.
Action: Sarah to draft a "definition of ready" checklist and add to our sprint template by next Monday.
2. API rate limiting was underestimated. We scope backend complexity incorrectly.
Action: Backend estimates to include +2 pts buffer for edge cases going forward.
## Next Sprint Priorities
1. Onboarding flow (14 pts) — only commit once design is signed off (definition of ready)
2. API rate limiting remaining edge cases (3 pts) — carry forward, small
3. [Next items from backlog based on roadmap priorities]
Recommended Sprint 24 capacity: 37 pts (80% of 3-sprint average of 39 pts)