mirror of https://github.com/github/spec-kit.git synced 2026-04-02 10:43:08 +00:00

Files

Arun Kumar Thiagarajan 6eb15a7a3e feat: add 5 gstack-inspired lifecycle commands (critique, review, qa, ship, retro)

Add 5 new core command templates inspired by Garry Tan's GStack to complete
the spec-driven development lifecycle:

- /speckit.critique: Dual-lens product + engineering review before implementation
- /speckit.review: Staff-level code review (correctness, security, performance)
- /speckit.qa: Systematic QA testing (browser-driven and CLI modes)
- /speckit.ship: Release automation (pre-flight, changelog, CI, PR creation)
- /speckit.retro: Sprint retrospective with metrics and improvement suggestions

Each command includes:
- Command template in templates/commands/
- Output report template in templates/
- Extension hook support (before_*/after_*)
- YAML frontmatter with prerequisite scripts

Updated README.md workflow from 6 to 11 steps and added CHANGELOG entry.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

2026-04-01 11:22:57 +05:30

3.1 KiB

Raw Blame History

Retrospective: [FEATURE NAME]

Date: [DATE] Feature: [Link to spec.md] Cycle: [first_commit_date] → [last_commit_date] Overall Assessment: [🌟 Excellent / ✅ Good / ⚠️ Adequate / 🔧 Needs Improvement]

Metrics Dashboard

📊 Development Cycle Metrics
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

📝 Specification
Requirements:      [total] total, [fulfilled] fulfilled, [partial] partial
Spec Accuracy:     [accuracy]%

📋 Planning
Tasks:             [total] total, [completed] completed
Added during impl: [unplanned_count]
Plan Score:        [EXCELLENT / GOOD / ADEQUATE / NEEDS IMPROVEMENT]

💻 Implementation
Commits:           [count]
Files changed:     [count]
Lines:             +[additions] / -[deletions]
Test/Code ratio:   [ratio]

🔍 Quality
Review findings:   🔴[blockers] 🟡[warnings] 🟢[suggestions]
QA pass rate:      [qa_pass_rate]%
Quality Score:     [score]

Specification Accuracy

Requirement	Status	Notes
[FR-001]	✅ Fulfilled
[FR-002]	⚠️ Partial	[deviation notes]
[FR-003]	❌ Not Implemented	[reason]
[Unplanned]	➕ Added	[why it was needed]

Accuracy Score: [X]% ([fulfilled + partial×0.5] / [total] requirements)

Plan Effectiveness

Aspect	Assessment	Details
Architecture decisions	✅/⚠️/❌	[which decisions worked/didn't]
Task scoping	✅/⚠️/❌	[well-sized / too large / too small]
Dependency ordering	✅/⚠️/❌	[any ordering issues]
Missing tasks	[count] added	[what was missed]

Plan Score: [EXCELLENT / GOOD / ADEQUATE / NEEDS IMPROVEMENT]

What Went Well 🎉

[Success area]: [Description of what worked and why]
[Success area]: [Description]
[Success area]: [Description]

What Could Improve 🔧

[Improvement area]: [Description of the issue and its impact]
[Improvement area]: [Description]
[Improvement area]: [Description]

Improvement Suggestions

ID	Impact	Category	Suggestion	Rationale
IMP-001	HIGH	[cat]	[specific action]	[why this matters]
IMP-002	MEDIUM	[cat]	[specific action]	[why this matters]
IMP-003	LOW	[cat]	[specific action]	[why this matters]

Categories: Specification, Planning, Implementation, Quality, Process

Historical Trends

Metric	Previous	Current	Trend
Spec accuracy	[%]	[%]	📈/📉/➡️
QA pass rate	[%]	[%]	📈/📉/➡️
Review blockers	[n]	[n]	📈/📉/➡️
Unplanned tasks	[n]	[n]	📈/📉/➡️

Suggested Constitution Updates

Based on this retrospective, consider adding these principles:

[Principle name]: [Principle description] Learned from: [specific experience in this cycle]

Generated by /speckit.retro — Sprint retrospective for spec-driven development.

3.1 KiB Raw Blame History Unescape Escape