session-retro
Skill3 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub
End-of-session retrospective that mines the current conversation for learnings. Use when the user says "retro", "session retro", "what did we learn", "extract learnings", "session review", "conversation review", or wants to capture insights before ending a session. Also trigger when the user asks to turn repeated patterns into skills or memory, or says "before we wrap up".
14 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jatinmishra/claude-skills-monorepotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- phntm7/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- adeonir/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- davisbuilds/dojotheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- TheAxeC/ordotheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- bbeny123/pragmatheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 14
- werf/werf★ 4.7ksame name
- Arman-Kudaibergenov/1c-ai-development-kit★ 163same name
- adeonir/agent-skills★ 8same name
- renzrollon/shippable-skills★ 7same name
- Zejnilovic/agd★ 5same name
- bbeny123/pragma★ 2same name
- Kwangseok-Seo/skills★ 2same name
- nhhthong/skills★ 1same name
- phntm7/skills★ 1same name
- anymasoft/1c-ai★ 0same name
4 more not listed
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 repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- code-simplificationSkill
- dcgSkill
- editorial-reviewSkill
- journalSkill
- readme-updateSkill
- security-and-hardeningSkill
- autopilotSkill
- blunder-huntSkill
- brainstormSkill
- convergence-detectSkill
- deslopSkill
- dispatch-parallelSkill
- doc-reviewSkill
- dreamSkill
- incremental-implementationSkill
- planning-and-task-breakdownSkill
- polishSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- refactor-planSkill
- scope-checkSkill
- security-auditSkill
- spec-driven-developmentSkill
- unstuckSkill
- verification-before-completionSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 12
Before scanning the current conversation alone, look at the last 3-5 retros (if any) in .claude/retros/ or in project-memory.
- Distinctive: line 16
Read through the full conversation and extract items in these categories:
- Distinctive: line 74
After the table, give a one-line recommendation for the single highest-impact item.
- Very specific: line 84
If convergence-detect is not installed, fall back to the heuristic: stop when a fresh round produces ≤20% new findings.
- Distinctive: line 99
After applying changes, summarize what was written and where.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 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
Session Retrospective
Review the current conversation to surface actionable learnings, then help the user decide what to persist.
Step 0: Cross-session pattern check
Before scanning the current conversation alone, look at the last 3-5 retros (if any) in .claude/retros/ or in project-memory. If a pattern is repeating across multiple sessions — same friction, same kind of error, same skill gap — surface it specifically. Cross-session patterns are higher-signal than one-off observations.
Step 1: Scan the Conversation
Read through the full conversation and extract items in these categories:
Errors & Fixes
- What broke and how it was fixed
- Root causes that were non-obvious
- Workarounds that succeeded after initial approaches failed
Repeated Patterns
- Sequences of tool calls or steps that appeared 3+ times
- Copy-pasted prompts or instructions given to subagents
- Manual processes that could be automated
User Corrections
- Times the user redirected your approach
- Explicit preferences stated ("always do X", "never do Y", "I prefer Z")
- Implicit preferences revealed by approvals/rejections
Knowledge Gained
- Codebase facts discovered (file locations, conventions, gotchas)
- External system behaviors learned (API quirks, tool limitations)
- Configuration or environment details that affected the work
Workflow Friction
- Steps that took multiple attempts
- Places where context was lost or repeated
- Tasks that would benefit from a hook, skill, or MCP server
Step 2: Present Findings
Group findings into a concise table:
## Session Retrospective
### Potential Memory Entries (persist across sessions)
| # | Finding | Type | Source |
|---|---------|------|--------|
| 1 | R2 bucket uploads need --content-type flag | codebase fact | error at turn 12 |
| 2 | User prefers max 10 concurrent agents | preference | explicit instruction |
### Potential Skill Opportunities (automate repeated work)
| # | Pattern | Frequency | Effort |
|---|---------|-----------|--------|
| 1 | Batch sentence generation with 10-agent concurrency | 5 times | medium |
### Potential Skill Improvements (existing skills that fell short)
| # | Skill | Issue | Suggestion |
|---|-------|-------|------------|
| 1 | generate-japanese | No furigana validation step | Add post-gen validation |
### Potential Hooks / Automation
| # | Trigger | Action | Why |
|---|---------|--------|-----|
| 1 | PostToolUse:Write on *.json | Validate JSON schema | Caught 3 malformed files |Omit any category that has zero findings — don't show empty tables.
After the table, give a one-line recommendation for the single highest-impact item.
Step 3: Ask What to Implement
Prompt: "Which items should I act on? Enter numbers by category (e.g., 'memory 1,2' or 'skill 1') — or 'all' to do everything."
Step 3.5: Convergence check (optional but recommended)
If you've extracted findings in 2+ rounds (e.g., re-running the retro after acting on the first set), invoke convergence-detect to decide whether another extraction round is worth it. Signals: output size shrinking, new-finding ratio dropping, content similarity to the last round rising. Stop when all three fire.
If convergence-detect is not installed, fall back to the heuristic: stop when a fresh round produces ≤20% new findings.
Step 3.6: Auto-apply mode
If the user invokes with --yes (or pastes "apply all"), skip per-item confirmation in Step 3 and go straight to Step 4 for every selected item. Surface a summary at the end: "Applied N items — M memory entries, K skill changes, J hooks. Skipped P items requiring user input."
Step 4: Execute
For each selected item:
- Memory entries → Write per the project-memory schema: frontmatter with
name/description/typeandsource: session-retro, body in the type-specific template, dedupe against existing entries, updateMEMORY.mdindex. - Skill opportunities → Draft a new SKILL.md following the Anthropic Agent Skills format. Keep it lean — the user can iterate later.
- Skill improvements → Read the existing skill, apply the suggested change, show a diff.
- Hooks / automation → Create the hook script and add the entry to the agent's settings file, following the agent-specific schema.
After applying changes, summarize what was written and where.
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.

