agentleFS
hongyuanchongyuanc/codex-game-studios/.agents/skills/scope-check/SKILL.md

scope-check

Skill5 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Compare a feature or sprint with its approved scope and report scope creep and recommended cuts.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. 4 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 4

    Common

    Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If the document is not found, report the missing file and stop.

    line 30
  2. Distinctive:

    Check what has actually been implemented or is in progress:

    line 37
  3. Very specific:

    Read git log for commits related to this work (git log --oneline --since=[start-date])

    line 40
  4. Common:

    Check for TODO/FIXME comments that indicate unfinished scope additions

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    Check active sprint plan if the feature is mid-sprint

    line 42
  6. Distinctive:

    After presenting the report, offer concrete follow-up:

    line 113
  7. Common:

    Not all additions are bad — some are discovered requirements.

    line 127
  8. Common:

    When recommending cuts, prioritize preserving the core player experience over nice-to-haves

    line 128
  9. Common:

    Always quantify scope changes — "it feels bigger" is not actionable, "+35% items" is

    line 129

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 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

Codex-native operating rules

Keep repository source artifacts read-only during analysis and cite concrete file evidence for every finding. Ask at most one user question per turn and wait for the answer. A report, tracking record, or phase-state update may be written only after its exact changeset and paths are approved. Do not fix reviewed source artifacts unless the user gives separate explicit authorization.

Scope Check

This skill is read-only — it reports findings but writes no files.

Compares original planned scope against current state to detect, quantify, and triage scope creep.

Argument: $ARGUMENTS[0] — feature name, sprint number, or milestone name.


Phase 1: Find the Original Plan

Locate the baseline scope document for the given argument:

  • Feature name → read design/gdd/[feature].md or matching file in design/
  • Sprint number (e.g., sprint-3) → read production/sprints/sprint-03.md or similar
  • Milestone → read production/milestones/[name].md

If the document is not found, report the missing file and stop. Do not proceed without a baseline to compare against.


Phase 2: Read the Current State

Check what has actually been implemented or is in progress:

  • Scan the codebase for files related to the feature/sprint
  • Read git log for commits related to this work (git log --oneline --since=[start-date])
  • Check for TODO/FIXME comments that indicate unfinished scope additions
  • Check active sprint plan if the feature is mid-sprint

Phase 3: Compare Original vs Current Scope

Produce the comparison report:

## Scope Check: [Feature/Sprint Name]
Generated: [Date]

### Original Scope
[List of items from the original plan]

### Current Scope
[List of items currently implemented or in progress]

### Scope Additions (not in original plan)
| Addition | Source | When | Justified? | Effort |
|----------|--------|------|------------|--------|
| [item] | [commit/person] | [date] | [Yes/No/Unclear] | [S/M/L] |

### Scope Removals (in original but dropped)
| Removed Item | Reason | Impact |
|-------------|--------|--------|
| [item] | [why removed] | [what's affected] |

### Bloat Score
- Original items: [N]
- Current items: [N]
- Items added: [N] (+[X]%)
- Items removed: [N]
- Net scope change: [+/-N] ([X]%)

### Risk Assessment
- **Schedule Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
- **Quality Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
- **Integration Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]

### Recommendations
1. **Cut**: [Items that should be removed to stay on schedule]
2. **Defer**: [Items that can move to a future sprint/version]
3. **Keep**: [Additions that are genuinely necessary]
4. **Flag**: [Items that need a decision from producer/creative-director]

Phase 4: Verdict

Assign a canonical verdict based on net scope change:

Net ChangeVerdictMeaning
≤10%PASSOn Track — within acceptable variance
10–25%CONCERNSMinor Creep — manageable with targeted cuts
25–50%FAILSignificant Creep — must cut or formally extend timeline
>50%FAILOut of Control — stop, re-plan, escalate to producer

Output the verdict prominently:

**Scope Verdict: [PASS / CONCERNS / FAIL]**
Net change: [+X%] — [On Track / Minor Creep / Significant Creep / Out of Control]

Phase 5: Next Steps

After presenting the report, offer concrete follow-up:

  • PASS → no action required. Suggest re-running before next milestone.
  • CONCERNS → offer to identify the 2–3 additions with best cut ratio. Reference $sprint-plan update to formally re-scope.
  • FAIL → recommend escalating to producer. Reference $sprint-plan update for re-planning or $estimate to re-baseline timeline.

Always end with:

"Run $scope-check [name] again after cuts are made to verify the verdict improves."


Rules

  • Scope creep is additions without corresponding cuts or timeline extensions
  • Not all additions are bad — some are discovered requirements. But they must be acknowledged and accounted for
  • When recommending cuts, prioritize preserving the core player experience over nice-to-haves
  • Always quantify scope changes — "it feels bigger" is not actionable, "+35% items" is

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.

Reviews can't be read right now.

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.