agentleFS
HunLuanZhiZhuHunLuanZhiZhu/Game-Studios-Plugin/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md

sprint-plan

Skill1 starsChanged 39 days agoMITView on GitHub

Generates a new sprint plan or updates an existing one based on the current milestone, completed work, and available capacity. Pulls context from production documents and design backlogs.

35 other projects use a version of this, 11 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

24 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 16 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 34 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 16

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    If --review [full|lean|solo] was passed → use that

    line 15
  2. Very specific:

    Read production/review-mode.txt if it exists.

    line 22
  3. Very specific:

    If the file doesn't exist and this is a new sprint: use AskUserQuestion:

    line 23
  4. Very specific:

    After selection: write production/review-mode.txt with the chosen mode.

    line 29
  5. Very specific:

    If the file doesn't exist and this is NOT a new sprint (e.g., updating an existing sprint): default to lean silently.

    line 30
  6. Very specific:

    Read the most recent sprint plan from production/sprints/.

    line 106
  7. Very specific:

    Ask the user what to change: stories to add, remove, reprioritize, or re-estimate.

    line 108
  8. Very specific:

    Write the updated markdown plan and yaml together (same approval as new mode).

    line 111
  9. Very specific:

    After generating a new sprint plan, also prepare the production/sprint-status.yaml content.

    line 152
  10. Very specific:

    Must Have tasks → priority: must-have, status: ready-for-dev

    line 192
  11. Very specific:

    Should Have tasks → priority: should-have, status: backlog

    line 193
  12. Very specific:

    Before finalising the sprint plan, spawn producer via Task using gate PR-SPRINT (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/director-gates.md).

    line 208
  13. Distinctive:

    If UNREALISTIC: revise the story selection (defer stories to Should Have or Nice to Have) and re-present the updated plan before asking for …

    line 214
  14. Very specific:

    If CONCERNS, use AskUserQuestion:

    line 216
  15. Distinctive:

    If [A]: proceed to write approval.

    line 223
  16. Distinctive:

    If [B]: revise the story list, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval.

    line 224
  17. Distinctive:

    If [C]: adjust sprint dates and capacity, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval.

    line 225
  18. Very specific:

    After handling the producer's verdict, ask: "May I write the sprint plan to production/sprints/sprint-[N].md and …

    line 227
  19. Distinctive:

    Before closing the sprint plan, check whether a QA plan exists for this sprint.

    line 237
  20. Very specific:

    Use Glob to look for production/qa/qa-plan-sprint-[N].md or any file in production/qa/ referencing this sprint number.

    line 239
  21. Distinctive:

    If no QA plan exists: do not silently proceed. Surface this explicitly:

    line 243
  22. Very specific:

    If [A]: close with "Sprint plan written.

    line 255
  23. Distinctive:

    If [B]: add a warning block to the sprint plan document:

    line 256
  24. Distinctive:

    After the sprint plan is written and QA plan status is resolved:

    line 268

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 34 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Phase 0: Parse Arguments

Extract the mode argument (new, update, or status) and resolve the review mode (once, store for all gate spawns this run):

  1. If --review [full|lean|solo] was passed → use that
  2. Else read production/review-mode.txt → use that value
  3. Else → default to lean

See ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern.

Review mode check (before gates run):

  • Read production/review-mode.txt if it exists. Use that mode.
  • If the file doesn't exist and this is a new sprint: use AskUserQuestion:
    • Prompt: "No review mode is set. Which review depth would you like for this sprint?"
    • Options:
      • [A] full — spawn all director and lead gates
      • [B] lean — skip non-phase-gate director reviews (recommended for most sprints)
      • [C] solo — skip all gate spawning
    • After selection: write production/review-mode.txt with the chosen mode. Say: "Review mode set to [mode] and saved to production/review-mode.txt."
  • If the file doesn't exist and this is NOT a new sprint (e.g., updating an existing sprint): default to lean silently.

Phase 1: Gather Context

  1. Read the current milestone from production/milestones/.
  2. Read the previous sprint (if any) from production/sprints/ to understand velocity and carryover.
  3. Scan design documents in design/gdd/ for features tagged as ready for implementation.
  4. Check the risk register at production/risk-register/.

Phase 2: Generate Output

For new:

Generate a sprint plan following this format and present it to the user. Do NOT ask to write yet — the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) runs first and may require revisions before the file is written.

# Sprint [N] — [Start Date] to [End Date]

## Sprint Goal
[One sentence describing what this sprint achieves toward the milestone]

## Capacity
- Total days: [X]
- Buffer (20%): [Y days reserved for unplanned work]
- Available: [Z days]

## Tasks

### Must Have (Critical Path)
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|

### Should Have
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|

### Nice to Have
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|

## Carryover from Previous Sprint
| Task | Reason | New Estimate |
|------|--------|-------------|

## Risks
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|------------|--------|------------|

## Dependencies on External Factors
- [List any external dependencies]

## Definition of Done for this Sprint
- [ ] All Must Have tasks completed
- [ ] All tasks pass acceptance criteria
- [ ] QA plan exists (`production/qa/qa-plan-sprint-[N].md`)
- [ ] All Logic/Integration stories have passing unit/integration tests
- [ ] Smoke check passed (`/smoke-check sprint`)
- [ ] QA sign-off report: APPROVED or APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS (`/team-qa sprint`)
- [ ] No S1 or S2 bugs in delivered features
- [ ] Design documents updated for any deviations
- [ ] Code reviewed and merged

For update:

Update an existing sprint plan:

  1. Read the most recent sprint plan from production/sprints/.
  2. Present the current story list with their current statuses from production/sprint-status.yaml.
  3. Ask the user what to change: stories to add, remove, reprioritize, or re-estimate. Use AskUserQuestion to gather changes.
  4. Apply the changes and re-present the full revised plan for review.
  5. Re-run the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) on the revised plan.
  6. Write the updated markdown plan and yaml together (same approval as new mode).

Note: update mode does not reset story statuses. Stories already marked in-progress or done keep their status. Only backlog and ready-for-dev stories can be removed or reprioritized freely.

For status:

Generate a status report:

# Sprint [N] Status -- [Date]

## Progress: [X/Y tasks complete] ([Z%])

### Completed
| Task | Completed By | Notes |
|------|-------------|-------|

### In Progress
| Task | Owner | % Done | Blockers |
|------|-------|--------|----------|

### Not Started
| Task | Owner | At Risk? | Notes |
|------|-------|----------|-------|

### Blocked
| Task | Blocker | Owner of Blocker | ETA |
|------|---------|-----------------|-----|

## Burndown Assessment
[On track / Behind / Ahead]
[If behind: What is being cut or deferred]

## Emerging Risks
- [Any new risks identified this sprint]

Phase 3: Prepare Sprint Status File

After generating a new sprint plan, also prepare the production/sprint-status.yaml content. This is the machine-readable source of truth for story status — read by /sprint-status, /story-done, and /help without markdown parsing.

Do not write the yaml yet — hold it in context. The producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) may revise the story list. Both files will be written together after Phase 4 in a single write approval.

Format:

# Auto-generated by /sprint-plan. Updated by /story-done and /dev-story.
# DO NOT edit manually — use /story-done to update story status.
#
# Status value mapping (yaml ↔ story file Status field):
#   backlog        ↔  Not Started
#   ready-for-dev  ↔  Ready
#   in-progress    ↔  In Progress
#   review         ↔  In Review
#   done           ↔  Complete
#   blocked        ↔  Blocked

sprint: [N]
goal: "[sprint goal]"
start: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
end: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
generated: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
updated: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"

stories:
  - id: "[epic-story, e.g. 1-1]"
    name: "[story name]"
    file: "[production/stories/path.md]"
    priority: must-have        # must-have | should-have | nice-to-have
    status: ready-for-dev      # backlog | ready-for-dev | in-progress | review | done | blocked
    owner: ""
    estimate_days: 0
    blocker: ""
    completed: ""

Initialize each story from the sprint plan's task tables:

  • Must Have tasks → priority: must-have, status: ready-for-dev
  • Should Have tasks → priority: should-have, status: backlog
  • Nice to Have tasks → priority: nice-to-have, status: backlog

For update: read the existing sprint-status.yaml, carry over statuses for stories that haven't changed, add new stories, remove dropped ones.


Phase 4: Producer Feasibility Gate

Review mode check — apply before spawning PR-SPRINT:

  • solo → skip. Note: "PR-SPRINT skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to Phase 5 (QA plan gate).
  • lean → skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "PR-SPRINT skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to Phase 5 (QA plan gate).
  • full → spawn as normal.

Before finalising the sprint plan, spawn producer via Task using gate PR-SPRINT (${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/director-gates.md).

Pass: proposed story list (titles, estimates, dependencies), total team capacity in hours/days, any carryover from the previous sprint, milestone constraints and deadline.

Present the producer's assessment.

If UNREALISTIC: revise the story selection (defer stories to Should Have or Nice to Have) and re-present the updated plan before asking for write approval.

If CONCERNS, use AskUserQuestion:

  • Prompt: "Producer flagged concerns with this sprint plan. How do you want to proceed?"
  • Options:
    • [A] Proceed as planned — I accept the risk
    • [B] Adjust scope — defer some Should Have stories
    • [C] Extend the sprint timeline

If [A]: proceed to write approval. If [B]: revise the story list, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval. If [C]: adjust sprint dates and capacity, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval.

After handling the producer's verdict, ask: "May I write the sprint plan to production/sprints/sprint-[N].md and production/sprint-status.yaml?" If yes, write both files (creating directories as needed). Verdict: COMPLETE — sprint plan and status file created. If no: Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.

After writing, add:

Scope check: If this sprint includes stories added beyond the original epic scope, run /scope-check [epic] to detect scope creep before implementation begins.


Phase 5: QA Plan Gate

Before closing the sprint plan, check whether a QA plan exists for this sprint.

Use Glob to look for production/qa/qa-plan-sprint-[N].md or any file in production/qa/ referencing this sprint number.

If a QA plan is found: note it in the sprint plan output — "QA Plan: [path]" — and proceed.

If no QA plan exists: do not silently proceed. Surface this explicitly:

"This sprint has no QA plan. A sprint plan without a QA plan means test requirements are undefined — developers won't know what 'done' looks like from a QA perspective, and the sprint cannot pass the Production → Polish gate without one.

Run /qa-plan sprint now, before starting any implementation. It takes one session and produces the test case requirements each story needs."

Use AskUserQuestion:

  • Prompt: "No QA plan found for this sprint. How do you want to proceed?"
  • Options:
    • [A] Run /qa-plan sprint now — I'll do that before starting implementation (Recommended)
    • [B] Skip for now — I understand QA sign-off will be blocked at the Production → Polish gate

If [A]: close with "Sprint plan written. Run /qa-plan sprint next — then begin implementation." If [B]: add a warning block to the sprint plan document:

> ⚠️ **No QA Plan**: This sprint was started without a QA plan. Run `/qa-plan sprint`
> before the last story is implemented. The Production → Polish gate requires a QA
> sign-off report, which requires a QA plan.

Phase 6: Next Steps

After the sprint plan is written and QA plan status is resolved:

  • /qa-plan sprint — required before implementation begins — defines test cases per story so developers implement against QA specs, not a blank slate
  • /story-readiness [story-file] — validate a story is ready before starting it
  • /dev-story [story-file] — begin implementing the first story
  • /sprint-status — check progress mid-sprint
  • /scope-check [epic] — verify no scope creep before implementation begins

Review mode configuration: All director gates (producer feasibility, QA review, code review) respect the project review mode. The review mode is set in Phase 0 when the file does not exist (for new sprints), or can be overridden per-run with --review full|lean|solo as an argument. The file production/review-mode.txt contains one of:

  • lean — skip automated director gates (default if file is absent — fastest for solo dev)
  • full — run all director gates as spawned sub-agents
  • solo — skip all gates unconditionally (single-developer, no review)

This file is read by /sprint-plan, /story-readiness, /story-done, and other skills at startup.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.