retro
Runtime Notes
- Ask the user directly when the workflow says to stop for input.
- Treat
AGENTS.md,TODO.md, andTODOS.mdas the likely sources of repo-local instructions. - Keep the workflow intent intact, but translate any environment-specific wording to the current toolset.
/retro — Weekly Engineering Retrospective
Generates a comprehensive engineering retrospective analyzing commit history, work patterns, and code quality metrics. Team-aware: identifies the user running the command, then analyzes every contributor with per-person praise and growth opportunities. Designed for a senior IC/CTO-level builder using a coding agent as a force multiplier.
User-invocable
Use this skill when the user asks for a retrospective or invokes retro.
Arguments
retro— default: last 7 daysretro 24h— last 24 hoursretro 14d— last 14 daysretro 30d— last 30 daysretro compare— compare current window vs prior same-length windowretro compare 14d— compare with explicit window
Instructions
Parse the argument to determine the time window. Default to 7 days if no argument given. Use --since="N days ago", --since="N hours ago", or --since="N weeks ago" (for w units) for git log queries. All times should be reported in Pacific time (use TZ=America/Los_Angeles when converting timestamps).
Argument validation: If the argument doesn't match a number followed by d, h, or w, the word compare, or compare followed by a number and d``h``w, show this usage and stop:
Usage: /retro [window]
/retro — last 7 days (default)
/retro 24h — last 24 hours
/retro 14d — last 14 days
/retro 30d — last 30 days
/retro compare — compare this period vs prior period
/retro compare 14d — compare with explicit window
Step 1: Gather Raw Data
First, fetch origin and identify the current user:
git fetch origin main --quiet
# Identify who is running the retro
git config user.name
git config user.email
The name returned by git config user.name is "you" — the person reading this retro. All other authors are teammates. Use this to orient the narrative: "your" commits vs teammate contributions.
Run ALL of these git commands in parallel (they are independent):
# 1. All commits in window with timestamps, subject, hash, AUTHOR, files changed, insertions, deletions
git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="%H|%aN|%ae|%ai|%s" --shortstat
# 2. Per-commit test vs total LOC breakdown with author
# Each commit block starts with COMMIT:<hash>|<author>, followed by numstat lines.
# Separate test files (matching test/|spec/|__tests__/) from production files.
git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="COMMIT:%H|%aN" --numstat
# 3. Commit timestamps for session detection and hourly distribution (with author)
# Use TZ=America/Los_Angeles for Pacific time conversion
TZ=America/Los_Angeles git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="%at|%aN|%ai|%s" | sort -n
# 4. Files most frequently changed (hotspot analysis)
git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="" --name-only | grep -v '^$' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn
# 5. PR numbers from commit messages (extract #NNN patterns)
git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="%s" | grep -oE '#[0-9]+' | sed 's/^#//' | sort -n | uniq | sed 's/^/#/'
# 6. Per-author file hotspots (who touches what)
git log origin/main --since="<window>" --format="AUTHOR:%aN" --name-only
# 7. Per-author commit counts (quick summary)
git shortlog origin/main --since="<window>" -sn --no-merges
Step 2: Compute Metrics
Calculate and present these metrics in a summary table:
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Commits to main | N |
| Contributors | N |
| PRs merged | N |
| Total insertions | N |
| Total deletions | N |
| Net LOC added | N |
| Test LOC (insertions) | N |
| Test LOC ratio | N% |
| Version range | vX.Y.Z.W → vX.Y.Z.W |
| Active days | N |
| Detected sessions | N |
| Avg LOC/session-hour | N |
Then show a per-author leaderboard immediately below:
Contributor Commits +/- Top area
You (garry) 32 +2400/-300 browse/
alice 12 +800/-150 app/services/
bob 3 +120/-40 tests/
Sort by commits descending. The current user (from git config user.name) always appears first, labeled "You (name)".
Step 3: Commit Time Distribution
Show hourly histogram in Pacific time using bar chart:
Hour Commits ████████████████
00: 4 ████
07: 5 █████
...
Identify and call out:
- Peak hours
- Dead zones
- Whether pattern is bimodal (morning/evening) or continuous
- Late-night coding clusters (after 10pm)
Step 4: Work Session Detection
Detect sessions using 45-minute gap threshold between consecutive commits. For each session report:
- Start/end time (Pacific)
- Number of commits
- Duration in minutes
Classify sessions:
- Deep sessions (50+ min)
- Medium sessions (20-50 min)
- Micro sessions (<20 min, typically single-commit fire-and-forget)
Calculate:
- Total active coding time (sum of session durations)
- Average session length
- LOC per hour of active time
Step 5: Commit Type Breakdown
Categorize by conventional commit prefix (feat/fix/refactor/test/chore/docs). Show as percentage bar:
feat: 20 (40%) ████████████████████
fix: 27 (54%) ███████████████████████████
refactor: 2 ( 4%) ██
Flag if fix ratio exceeds 50% — this signals a "ship fast, fix fast" pattern that may indicate review gaps.
Step 6: Hotspot Analysis
Show top 10 most-changed files. Flag:
- Files changed 5+ times (churn hotspots)
- Test files vs production files in the hotspot list
- VERSION/CHANGELOG frequency (version discipline indicator)
Step 7: PR Size Distribution
From commit diffs, estimate PR sizes and bucket them:
- Small (<100 LOC)
- Medium (100-500 LOC)
- Large (500-1500 LOC)
- XL (1500+ LOC) — flag these with file counts
Step 8: Focus Score + Ship of the Week
Focus score: Calculate the percentage of commits touching the single most-changed top-level directory (e.g., app/services/, app/views/). Higher score = deeper focused work. Lower score = scattered context-switching. Report as: "Focus score: 62% (app/services/)"
Ship of the week: Auto-identify the single highest-LOC PR in the window. Highlight it:
- PR number and title
- LOC changed
- Why it matters (infer from commit messages and files touched)
Step 9: Team Member Analysis
For each contributor (including the current user), compute:
- Commits and LOC — total commits, insertions, deletions, net LOC
- Areas of focus — which directories/files they touched most (top 3)
- Commit type mix — their personal feat/fix/refactor/test breakdown
- Session patterns — when they code (their peak hours), session count
- Test discipline — their personal test LOC ratio
- Biggest ship — their single highest-impact commit or PR in the window
For the current user ("You"): This section gets the deepest treatment. Include all the detail from the solo retro — session analysis, time patterns, focus score. Frame it in first person: "Your peak hours...", "Your biggest ship..."
For each teammate: Write 2-3 sentences covering what they worked on and their pattern. Then:
- Praise (1-2 specific things): Anchor in actual commits. Not "great work" — say exactly what was good. Examples: "Shipped the entire auth middleware rewrite in 3 focused sessions with 45% test coverage", "Every PR under 200 LOC — disciplined decomposition."
- Opportunity for growth (1 specific thing): Frame as a leveling-up suggestion, not criticism. Anchor in actual data. Examples: "Test ratio was 12% this week — adding test coverage to the payment module before it gets more complex would pay off", "5 fix commits on the same file suggest the original PR could have used a review pass."
If only one contributor (solo repo): Skip the team breakdown and proceed as before — the retro is personal.
If there are Co-Authored-By trailers: Parse Co-Authored-By: lines in commit messages. Credit those authors for the commit alongside the primary author. Note AI co-authors (e.g., noreply@anthropic.com) but do not include them as team members — instead, track "AI-assisted commits" as a separate metric.
Step 10: Week-over-Week Trends (if window >= 14d)
If the time window is 14 days or more, split into weekly buckets and show trends:
- Commits per week (total and per-author)
- LOC per week
- Test ratio per week
- Fix ratio per week
- Session count per week
Step 11: Streak Tracking
Count consecutive days with at least 1 commit to origin/main, going back from today. Track both team streak and personal streak:
# Team streak: all unique commit dates (Pacific time) — no hard cutoff
TZ=America/Los_Angeles git log origin/main --format="%ad" --date=format:"%Y-%m-%d" | sort -u
# Personal streak: only the current user's commits
TZ=America/Los_Angeles git log origin/main --author="<user_name>" --format="%ad" --date=format:"%Y-%m-%d" | sort -u
Count backward from today — how many consecutive days have at least one commit? This queries the full history so streaks of any length are reported accurately. Display both:
- "Team shipping streak: 47 consecutive days"
- "Your shipping streak: 32 consecutive days"
Step 12: Load History & Compare
Before saving the new snapshot, check for prior retro history:
ls -t .context/retros/*.json 2>/dev/null
If prior retros exist: Load the most recent one using the Read tool. Calculate deltas for key metrics and include a Trends vs Last Retro section:
Last Now Delta
Test ratio: 22% → 41% ↑19pp
Sessions: 10 → 14 ↑4
LOC/hour: 200 → 350 ↑75%
Fix ratio: 54% → 30% ↓24pp (improving)
Commits: 32 → 47 ↑47%
Deep sessions: 3 → 5 ↑2
If no prior retros exist: Skip the comparison section and append: "First retro recorded — run again next week to see trends."
Step 13: Save Retro History
After computing all metrics (including streak) and loading any prior history for comparison, save a JSON snapshot:
mkdir -p .context/retros
Determine the next sequence number for today (substitute the actual date for $(date +%Y-%m-%d)):
# Count existing retros for today to get next sequence number
today=$(TZ=America/Los_Angeles date +%Y-%m-%d)
existing=$(ls .context/retros/${today}-*.json 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
next=$((existing + 1))
# Save as .context/retros/${today}-${next}.json
Use the Write tool to save the JSON file with this schema:
{
"date": "2026-03-08",
"window": "7d",
"metrics": {
"commits": 47,
"contributors": 3,
"prs_merged": 12,
"insertions": 3200,
"deletions": 800,
"net_loc": 2400,
"test_loc": 1300,
"test_ratio": 0.41,
"active_days": 6,
"sessions": 14,
"deep_sessions": 5,
"avg_session_minutes": 42,
"loc_per_session_hour": 350,
"feat_pct": 0.40,
"fix_pct": 0.30,
"peak_hour": 22,
"ai_assisted_commits": 32
},
"authors": {
"Garry Tan": { "commits": 32, "insertions": 2400, "deletions": 300, "test_ratio": 0.41, "top_area": "browse/" },
"Alice": { "commits": 12, "insertions": 800, "deletions": 150, "test_ratio": 0.35, "top_area": "app/services/" }
},
"version_range": ["1.16.0.0", "1.16.1.0"],
"streak_days": 47,
"tweetable": "Week of Mar 1: 47 commits (3 contributors), 3.2k LOC, 38% tests, 12 PRs, peak: 10pm"
}
Step 14: Write the Narrative
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 11, loaded before save — skip if first retro)
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 discipline (are PRs staying small?)
- Fix-chain detection (sequences of fix commits on the same subsystem)
- Version bump discipline
Code Quality Signals
- Test LOC ratio trend
- Hotspot analysis (are the same files churning?)
- Any XL PRs that should have been split
Focus & Highlights
(from Step 8)
- Focus score with interpretation
- Ship of the week callout
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"
- "3 of the 5 PRs were 800+ LOC — breaking these up would catch issues earlier and make review easier"
- "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., Codex, 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..."
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)
Compare Mode
When the user runs retro compare (or retro compare 14d):
- Compute metrics for the current window (default 7d) using
--since="7 days ago" - Compute metrics for the immediately prior same-length window using both
--sinceand--untilto avoid overlap (e.g.,--since="14 days ago" --until="7 days ago"for a 7d window) - Show a side-by-side comparison table with deltas and arrows
- Write a brief narrative highlighting the biggest improvements and regressions
- Save only the current-window snapshot to
.context/retros/(same as a normal retro run); do not persist the prior-window metrics.
Tone
- Encouraging but candid, no coddling
- Specific and concrete — always anchor in actual commits/code
- Skip generic praise ("great job!") — say exactly what was good and why
- Frame improvements as leveling up, not criticism
- Praise should feel like something you'd actually say in a 1:1 — specific, earned, genuine
- Growth suggestions should feel like investment advice — "this is worth your time because..." not "you failed at..."
- Never compare teammates against each other negatively. Each person's section stands on its own.
- Keep total output around 3000-4500 words (slightly longer to accommodate team sections)
- Use markdown tables and code blocks for data, prose for narrative
- Output directly to the conversation — do NOT write to filesystem (except the
.context/retros/JSON snapshot)
Important Rules
- ALL narrative output goes directly to the user in the conversation. The ONLY file written is the
.context/retros/JSON snapshot. - Use
origin/mainfor all git queries (not local main which may be stale) - Convert all timestamps to Pacific time for display (use
TZ=America/Los_Angeles) - If the window has zero commits, say so and suggest a different window
- Round LOC/hour to nearest 50
- Treat merge commits as PR boundaries
- Do not read repo docs or other docs — this skill is self-contained
- On first run (no prior retros), skip comparison sections gracefully