milestone-review
Skill1 starsChanged 40 days agoMITView on GitHub
Generates a comprehensive milestone progress review including feature completeness, quality metrics, risk assessment, and go/no-go recommendation. Use at milestone checkpoints or when evaluating readiness for a milestone deadline.
17 other projects use a version of this, 10 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiosedited, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- Cassandra-Collective/Ephesustheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studiosedited, first seen Oct 19, 2026
- venus2099/codex-game-studiosedited, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- zajca/pohunektheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- scotidev/GameDevStudioedited, first seen Oct 9, 2026
Other versions17 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 10
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27k36% same
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 11895% same
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 7155% same
- CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 1987% same
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 1794% same
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 896% same
- hongyuanc/codex-game-studios★ 575% same
- dawn840705/claude-code-studios★ 196% same
- scotidev/GameDevStudio★ 187% same
- venus2099/codex-game-studios★ 135% same
Wrote their own version · 7
- pixel-cellar/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 324same name
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- CodePhobiia/claude-roblox-game-studio★ 9same name
- zajca/pohunek★ 8same name
- timjrobinson/Claude-Code-Construction-Manager★ 4same name
- Cassandra-Collective/Ephesus★ 2same name
- mertefesensoy/Ephesus★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository78 other files it gives its agents.
- docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- adoptSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- art-bibleSkill
- asset-auditSkill
- asset-specSkill
- auto-game-in-sleepSkill
- balance-checkSkill
- brainstormSkill
- bug-reportSkill
- bug-triageSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- comfyui-headless-image21Skill
- comfyui-headless-pixal3dSkill
- consistency-checkSkill
- content-auditSkill
- create-architectureSkill
- create-control-manifestSkill
- create-epicsSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- day-one-patchSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- estimateSkill
- game-studios-initSkill
- gate-checkSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- launch-checklistSkill
- localizeSkill
- map-systemsSkill
- onboardSkill
- patch-notesSkill
- perf-profileSkill
- playtest-reportSkill
- project-stage-detectSkill
- propagate-design-changeSkill
- prototypeSkill
- qa-planSkill
- quick-designSkill
- regression-suiteSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- reverse-documentSkill
- review-all-gddsSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- setup-engineSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- skill-testSkill
- smoke-checkSkill
- soak-testSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- story-readinessSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 10 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
10
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 13
If --review [full|lean|solo] was passed → use that
- Very specific: line 23
Read the milestone definition from production/milestones/.
- Very specific: line 25
Read all sprint reports for sprints within this milestone from production/sprints/.
- Very specific: line 32
Check the risk register at production/risk-register/
- Very specific: line 117
Before generating the Go/No-Go recommendation, spawn producer via Task using gate PR-MILESTONE …
- Very specific: line 123
If OFF TRACK, use AskUserQuestion before generating the recommendation:
- Very specific: line 130
If AT RISK, use AskUserQuestion:
- Distinctive: line 137
Do not issue a GO against an OFF TRACK verdict unless the user explicitly selects [B] above.
- Very specific: line 145
Ask: "May I write this to production/milestones/[milestone-name]-review.md?"
- Distinctive: line 147
If yes, write the file, creating the directory if needed.
- Distinctive: line 149
If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.
- Very specific: line 155
Run /gate-check for a formal phase gate verdict if this milestone marks a development phase boundary.
- Very specific: line 156
Run /sprint-plan to adjust the next sprint based on the scope recommendations above.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 16 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Phase 0: Parse Arguments
Extract the milestone name (current or a specific name) and resolve the review mode (once, store for all gate spawns this run):
- If
--review [full|lean|solo]was passed → use that - Else read
production/review-mode.txt→ use that value - Else → default to
lean
See ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern.
Phase 1: Load Milestone Data
Read the milestone definition from production/milestones/. If the argument is current, use the most recently modified milestone file.
Read all sprint reports for sprints within this milestone from production/sprints/.
Phase 2: Scan Codebase Health
- Scan for
TODO,FIXME,HACKmarkers that indicate incomplete work - Check the risk register at
production/risk-register/
Phase 3: Generate the Milestone Review
# Milestone Review: [Milestone Name]
## Overview
- **Target Date**: [Date]
- **Current Date**: [Today]
- **Days Remaining**: [N]
- **Sprints Completed**: [X/Y]
## Feature Completeness
### Fully Complete
| Feature | Acceptance Criteria | Test Status |
|---------|-------------------|-------------|
### Partially Complete
| Feature | % Done | Remaining Work | Risk to Milestone |
|---------|--------|---------------|------------------|
### Not Started
| Feature | Priority | Can Cut? | Impact of Cutting |
|---------|----------|----------|------------------|
## Quality Metrics
- **Open S1 Bugs**: [N] -- [List]
- **Open S2 Bugs**: [N]
- **Open S3 Bugs**: [N]
- **Test Coverage**: [X%]
- **Performance**: [Within budget? Details]
## Code Health
- **TODO count**: [N across codebase]
- **FIXME count**: [N]
- **HACK count**: [N]
- **Technical debt items**: [List critical ones]
## Risk Assessment
| Risk | Status | Impact if Realized | Mitigation Status |
|------|--------|-------------------|------------------|
## Velocity Analysis
- **Planned vs Completed** (across all sprints): [X/Y tasks = Z%]
- **Trend**: [Improving / Stable / Declining]
- **Adjusted estimate for remaining work**: [Days needed at current velocity]
## Scope Recommendations
### Protect (Must ship with milestone)
- [Feature and why]
### At Risk (May need to cut or simplify)
- [Feature and risk]
### Cut Candidates (Can defer without compromising milestone)
- [Feature and impact of cutting]
## Go/No-Go Assessment
**Recommendation**: [GO / CONDITIONAL GO / NO-GO]
**Conditions** (if conditional):
- [Condition 1 that must be met]
- [Condition 2 that must be met]
**Rationale**: [Explanation of the recommendation]
## Action Items
| # | Action | Owner | Deadline |
|---|--------|-------|----------|Phase 3b: Producer Risk Assessment
Review mode check — apply before spawning PR-MILESTONE:
solo→ skip. Note: "PR-MILESTONE skipped — Solo mode." Present the Go/No-Go section without a producer verdict.lean→ skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "PR-MILESTONE skipped — Lean mode." Present the Go/No-Go section without a producer verdict.full→ spawn as normal.
Before generating the Go/No-Go recommendation, spawn producer via Task using gate PR-MILESTONE (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/director-gates.md).
Pass: milestone name and target date, current completion percentage, blocked story count, velocity data from sprint reports (if available), list of cut candidates.
Present the producer's assessment inline within the Go/No-Go section. The producer's verdict (ON TRACK / AT RISK / OFF TRACK) informs the overall recommendation.
If OFF TRACK, use AskUserQuestion before generating the recommendation:
- Prompt: "Producer verdict: OFF TRACK. The milestone is in jeopardy. This review will recommend NO-GO. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Accept NO-GO — generate the full review with that recommendation[B] Override to CONDITIONAL GO — I'll document the accepted risks myself[C] Stop — I want to address blockers before generating the review
If AT RISK, use AskUserQuestion:
- Prompt: "Producer verdict: AT RISK. Milestone may slip. How should the Go/No-Go section be framed?"
- Options:
[A] CONDITIONAL GO — include producer's conditions in the review[B] NO-GO — conditions cannot be met in time[C] GO — I accept the risk and want to proceed
Do not issue a GO against an OFF TRACK verdict unless the user explicitly selects [B] above.
Phase 4: Save Review
Present the review to the user.
Ask: "May I write this to production/milestones/[milestone-name]-review.md?"
If yes, write the file, creating the directory if needed. Verdict: COMPLETE — milestone review saved.
If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.
Phase 5: Next Steps
- Run
/gate-checkfor a formal phase gate verdict if this milestone marks a development phase boundary. - Run
/sprint-planto adjust the next sprint based on the scope recommendations above.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

