milestone-review
GitHub用于里程碑进度审查,评估完整性、质量指标和风险,并提供 go/no-go 建议。严格检查输入数据存在性,防止无数据时的误判,基于里程碑定义和冲刺报告生成审查结论。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios --skill milestone-review -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "milestone-review",
"model": "sonnet",
"description": "Milestone progress review — completeness, quality metrics, risk, go\/no-go recommendation. At checkpoints or before a deadline.",
"allowed-tools": "Read, Glob, Grep, Write, Agent, AskUserQuestion, Bash(bash \"*\/.claude\/skills\/milestone-review\/..\/..\/hooks\/yaml-helper.sh\" resolve_config *)",
"argument-hint": "[milestone-name|current] [--review full|lean|solo]",
"user-invocable": true
}
!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation
Insufficient input — check this before producing any report
If the inputs this skill needs do not exist, the answer is "could not run" — not a filled-in report. Check first, and stop if the check fails.
- List the inputs this skill reads (data files, prior reports, profiler output, test results, registries, source code).
- For each, record
FOUNDorABSENT— not "assumed present". - If any input required for a section is ABSENT, that section is
NOT ASSESSED — NO DATA. Do not estimate it, do not infer it from an adjacent artifact, and do not leave a mandated cell to be filled by whoever reads the template next. - If every required input is ABSENT, stop and report
NOT ASSESSED — NO DATAas the whole verdict, naming what was missing and which skill produces it.
A verdict of NOT ASSESSED is a success. It is the correct, useful answer to
"what does the data say?" when there is no data. The failure mode this prevents is
specific and has been observed in practice: report templates whose verdict
enum had no "could not run" state produced false clean passes — an asset audit
returning COMPLIANT on a project with no assets and no standards, and a
performance profile reporting ">99% headroom against a 16.67ms budget" with zero
profiler data and no budget ever set.
Absence of evidence is never evidence of absence. A scan that finds no matches because there are no files to scan has not verified anything. Say which of the two happened — a reader cannot tell from a green result.
Phase 0: Parse Arguments
Extract the milestone name (current or a specific name).
See .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in .claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
automation_always_ask categories always prompt).
Phase 1: Load Milestone Data
Read the milestone definition from production/milestones/ if it exists. If the
argument is current, use the most recently modified milestone file.
No skill writes
production/milestones/— definitions are authored by hand from.claude/docs/templates/milestone-definition.md, so most projects have none. When the directory is absent or empty, say so and review against the sprint reports alone; do not fabricate a definition. Take care withcurrent: this skill writes its own output as[milestone-name]-review.md, so a most-recently-modified match can be a previous review rather than a definition. Skip files ending-review.mdwhen selecting.
Gather the sprint reports for sprints within this milestone from
production/sprints/. Establish the denominator (glob them, count N), then
scan the sections a milestone review actually aggregates rather than reading each
report whole:
Grep pattern="^## (Sprint Goal|Capacity|Tasks|Carryover|Risks|Progress|Burndown Assessment|Emerging Risks|Definition of Done)" glob="production/sprints/sprint-*.md" output_mode="content" -A 12
These alternates are copied from
/sprint-plan's emitted headings — keep them in sync with it, not with what a milestone review wishes existed. The previous pattern asked forSummary|Goal|Velocity|Completed|Blockers| Retrospective, none of which/sprint-planwrites (it emits## Sprint Goal, not## Goal). OnlyCarryovermatched — and that was the trap: a non-zero match count meant the zero-match escape hatch below could never fire, so every milestone review silently aggregated carryover tables and nothing else while reporting full coverage.
Full-read a single sprint report when its scanned sections point outside themselves, or when it matched nothing — a zero-match report predates the template and must be read, never silently dropped from the milestone's history. Report any sprint that contributed nothing: a milestone summary that quietly omits a sprint understates the work and the slippage both.
Phase 2: Scan Codebase Health
- Scan for
TODO,FIXME,HACKmarkers that indicate incomplete work - Check the risk register at
production/risk-register/if it exists (hand-authored from.claude/docs/templates/risk-register-entry.md; no skill writes it, so absence is normal — note it rather than skipping risk assessment silently)
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**: [NOT ASSESSED / 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 Agent using gate PR-MILESTONE (.claude/docs/director-gates/pr-milestone.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.
Version History
-
7ed2c3e
Current 2026-09-28 04:03
修复配置解析逻辑,解决非自动模式下因命令权限检查失败导致技能无法启动的问题(Issue #128)。
- 984023d 2026-07-25 09:37


