scope-check

Installation
SKILL.md

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 Change Verdict Meaning
≤10% PASS On Track — within acceptable variance
10–25% CONCERNS Minor Creep — manageable with targeted cuts
25–50% FAIL Significant Creep — must cut or formally extend timeline
>50% FAIL Out 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
Related skills
Installs
59
GitHub Stars
17.6K
First Seen
Mar 1, 2026