Files
gstack/retro/sections/report-format.md.tmpl
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

129 lines
5.6 KiB
Cheetah

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)
### Trends vs Last Retro
(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:
```bash
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").
### Week-over-Week Trends
(if applicable, from Step 10)