Files
gstack/retro/sections/report-format.md
T
Garry Tanandcapy-ai[bot] 8663c3d25f v1.91.252.0 feat(retro): factory scorecard (lead time, gate cost, red-train and flaky rates) and the recommended-harness adoption doc (#3471)
* feat(retro): factory scorecard bin (lead time, gate cost, red-train and flaky rates) and the recommended-harness adoption doc

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test(scorecard): register the recorded gh fixture with its free consumer

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test(scorecard): cover --gate-event any, an empty window, a failed PR read and a bad --now

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: pre-landing review fixes

Review pass 1 (core checklist, testing, maintainability, security, performance, simplification, state-machines, red team) over the whole diff:
- the flaky line and cost-per-merge depend on every input they read, so a failed free-run or PR read prints unavailable (...) on its half instead of 0
- a PR verdict-comment cost backs one gate run per PR; a READY comment after the merge is ignored
- one unreadable artifact leaves its run without cost or flake data instead of dropping the gate section
- --repo defaults to the origin owner/name and is required without one (no built-in repository)
- --max-artifact-runs, --pass-cap and --pass-marker are validated; --csv creates its directory
- one artifact listing per gate run; PR comments are paged; issues use the exact window instant
- every run appends its rows to trend.csv in --out-dir
- new row: review passes per PR (median, p90, PRs at the cap) from the ship receipt or a comment marker
- /retro: report format gains the Factory scorecard slot; the Step 7.5 fence quotes its placeholder
- tests for each; <window-days> joins the placeholder allowlist

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix: review pass 2 (delta): usage text, pass-marker capture group, GitHub-host origin parsing, idempotent trend.csv

- usage() strips the header comment decoration again; --help text asserted
- passCount takes the first all-digit capture group; --pass-marker without a capture group exits 2
- --repo falls back to the origin remote only on github.com or GH_HOST; a local-path origin exits 2
- trend.csv keeps one row set per repo and window (a rerun replaces its rows) and always carries its header
- /retro Step 7.5 points at SCORECARD_TREND for the weeks; the doc cites the per-PR baseline CSV

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test(host-conformance): delete a named section in the C3 broken-link case

The case removed the first .md readdirSync returned under gstack-qa/sections.
qa-patterns.md and system-functional.md are referenced only in table form, which
setup --status does not count as section links, so on an ext4 directory order
that listed one of them first the deleted file broke nothing and --status exited
0: deterministic red on remote-gate VMs, green on Actions. Delete scope.md, which
every host's rendered SKILL.md reads.

Closes #3479

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* v1.91.252.0 stamp

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-26 17:50:02 +00:00

5.8 KiB

Structure the output as:


Tweetable summary (first line, before everything else):

Week of Mar 1: 47 commits (3 contributors), 3.2k LOC, 38% tests, 12 PRs, peak: 10pm | Streak: 47d

Engineering Retro: [date range]

Summary Table

(from Step 2)

(from Step 12, loaded before save — skip if no matching history; in compare mode use Current vs Prior Period from the computed prior window even on the first run). Include the Recommendation follow-through line when Step 12 produced one.

Time & Session Patterns

(from Steps 3-4)

Narrative interpreting what the team-wide patterns mean:

  • When the most productive hours are and what drives them
  • Whether sessions are getting longer or shorter over time
  • Estimated hours per day of active coding (team aggregate)
  • Notable patterns: do team members code at the same time or in shifts?

Shipping Velocity

(from Steps 5-7)

Narrative covering:

  • Commit type mix and what it reveals
  • PR size distribution and what it reveals about shipping cadence
  • Fix-chain detection (sequences of fix commits on the same subsystem)
  • Version bump discipline

Factory scorecard

(from Step 7.5 when it ran; the table as printed, unavailable (...) lines kept; omit the section when the step was skipped)

Code Quality Signals

  • Test LOC ratio trend
  • Hotspot analysis (are the same files churning?)
  • Greptile signal ratio and trend (if history exists): "Greptile: X% signal (Y valid catches, Z false positives)"

Test Health

  • Total test files: N (TEST_FILES_TOTAL)
  • Test files changed this period: M (TEST_FILES_CHANGED; not newly added test cases)
  • Regression test commits: list the REGRESSION_COMMIT lines (test(qa):, test(design):, and test: coverage commits)
  • If prior retro exists and has test_health: show delta "Test count: {last} → {now} (+{delta})"
  • If test ratio < 20%: flag as growth area — "100% test coverage is the goal. Tests make vibe coding safe."

Plan Completion

Check review JSONL logs for plan completion data from /ship runs this period:

GSTACK_STATE_ROOT=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-paths --get GSTACK_STATE_ROOT); : "${GSTACK_STATE_ROOT:?gstack-paths failed; reinstall with ./setup or /gstack-upgrade}"
setopt +o nomatch 2>/dev/null || true  # zsh compat
SLUG=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug --get SLUG 2>/dev/null)
cat "$GSTACK_STATE_ROOT"/projects/$SLUG/*-reviews.jsonl 2>/dev/null | grep '"skill":"ship"' | grep '"plan_items_total"' || echo "NO_PLAN_DATA"

If plan completion data exists within the retro time window:

  • Count branches shipped with plans (entries that have plan_items_total > 0)
  • Compute average completion: sum of plan_items_done / sum of plan_items_total
  • Identify most-skipped item category if data supports it

Output:

Plan Completion This Period:
  {N} branches shipped with plans
  Average completion: {X}% ({done}/{total} items)

If no plan data exists, skip this section silently.

Focus & Highlights

(from Step 8)

  • Focus score with interpretation
  • Ship of the week callout

Shipping Streaks

(from Step 11: team and personal streaks, including broken-streak disclosure)

Shortcut Debt

(from Step 11.5: marker ledger and count, or the clean-ledger statement)

Your Week (personal deep-dive)

(from Step 9, for the current user only)

This is the section the user cares most about. Include:

  • Their personal commit count, LOC, test ratio
  • Their session patterns and peak hours
  • Their focus areas
  • Their biggest ship
  • What you did well (2-3 specific things anchored in commits)
  • Where to level up (1-2 specific, actionable suggestions)

Team Breakdown

(from Step 9, for each teammate — skip if solo repo)

For each teammate (sorted by commits descending), write a section:

[Name]

  • What they shipped: 2-3 sentences on their contributions, areas of focus, and commit patterns
  • Praise: 1-2 specific things they did well, anchored in actual commits. Be genuine — what would you actually say in a 1:1? Examples:
    • "Cleaned up the entire auth module in 3 small, reviewable PRs — textbook decomposition"
    • "Added integration tests for every new endpoint, not just happy paths"
    • "Fixed the N+1 query that was causing 2s load times on the dashboard"
  • Opportunity for growth: 1 specific, constructive suggestion. Frame as investment, not criticism. Examples:
    • "Test coverage on the payment module is at 8% — worth investing in before the next feature lands on top of it"
    • "Most commits land in a single burst — spacing work across the day could reduce context-switching fatigue"
    • "All commits land between 1-4am — sustainable pace matters for code quality long-term"

AI collaboration note: If many commits have Co-Authored-By AI trailers (e.g., Claude, Copilot), note the AI-assisted commit percentage as a team metric. Frame it neutrally — "N% of commits were AI-assisted" — without judgment.

Top 3 Team Wins

Identify the 3 highest-impact things shipped in the window across the whole team. For each:

  • What it was
  • Who shipped it
  • Why it matters (product/architecture impact)

3 Things to Improve

Specific, actionable, anchored in actual commits. Mix personal and team-level suggestions. Phrase as "to get even better, the team could..." These are the items saved as recommendations in the Step 13 snapshot, which the next retro scores for follow-through, so name a concrete file, script or check in each.

3 Habits for Next Week

Small, practical, realistic. Each must be something that takes <5 minutes to adopt. At least one should be team-oriented (e.g., "review each other's PRs same-day").

(if applicable, from Step 10)