!bash "${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../hooks/yaml-helper.sh" resolve_config --keys review_mode,automation,story_granularity,workflow
Resolved above — use as-is; --review overrides review_mode. No block →
defaults in .claude/docs/config-resolution.md.
Existing Sprints
!ls production/sprints/ 2>/dev/null || echo "(no production/sprints/ directory yet)"
Resolved before this skill runs — use it to identify the previous sprint in Phase 1 rather than re-globbing.
Phase 0: Parse Arguments
Extract the mode argument (new, update, or status).
See .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern. Individual gate definitions live in .claude/docs/director-gates/[gate-id].md — the spawned agent reads its own gate file; do not read it in the parent session.
Every AskUserQuestion call follows .claude/docs/automation-modes.md
(collaborative asks always · guided major-only · autonomous logs and proceeds;
automation_always_ask categories always prompt).
story_granularity — it sets how
many stories to allocate per sprint, scaled by velocity: 2–4 at coarse,
6–10 at balanced (default), 15–25 at fine.
Review mode check (before gates run):
- The review mode was already resolved in steps 1–4 above — do not re-resolve it.
- Special case: if steps 1–3 all found nothing configured (no
--reviewflag, nomodes.review_modeinproject.yaml, noproduction/review-mode.txt) and this is anewsprint, do not silently take the step-4leandefault — instead useAskUserQuestion:- Prompt: "No review mode is set. Which review depth would you like for this sprint?"
- Options:
[A] full — spawn all director and lead gates[B] lean — skip non-phase-gate director reviews (recommended for most sprints)[C] solo — skip all gate spawning
- After selection: dual-write the chosen mode — set
modes.review_modeinproject.yaml(primary; add themodes:block if absent) AND writeproduction/review-mode.txt(legacy fallback). Say: "Review mode set to [mode] and saved to project.yaml (and production/review-mode.txt)."
- In every other case the value resolved in steps 1–4 stands (for a non-
newsprint with nothing configured, that is theleandefault).
Do not write until Phase 1 confirms the sprint can be planned. This write lands in Phase 0, before the Phase 1 backlog check that aborts the run — observed live: the run correctly BLOCKED on "No stories found under
production/epics/" andproject.yamlhad already gainedreview_mode: lean. A skill that decides it cannot run must not have edited config on the way to deciding. Hold the selection in memory, complete Phase 1, and write only if planning proceeds. Confirm the destination before writing. The question above asks for review depth "for this sprint"; the write is permanent project config on a rigor-fronted knob. Ask explicitly: "Setmodes.review_mode: [mode]inproject.yaml(persists beyond this sprint), or use it for this sprint only?"
Phase 1: Gather Context
-
Read the current milestone from
production/milestones/if it exists. No skill writes this directory — it is authored by hand from.claude/docs/templates/milestone-definition.md. On the majority of projects it is absent, which is the normal state, not a gap: note "no milestone defined — planning against the story backlog alone" and continue. Never block sprint planning on it, and never infer a milestone from the sprint files. -
Read the previous sprint (if any) from
production/sprints/to understand velocity and carryover. -
Find the stories to plan — this is the actual backlog, and it is the one input this phase cannot do without:
Glob production/epics/**/story-*.md Grep pattern="^> \*\*Status\*\*" glob="production/epics/**/story-*.md" output_mode="content"Stories live at
production/epics/[epic-slug]/story-NNN-[slug].md— that is where/create-storieswrites them and where/dev-storylooks for them. Plan from the ones markedReady. Use the grep rather than reading each story: at this stage you need status and title, not the body.If the glob returns nothing: "No stories found under
production/epics/. Run/create-storiesfirst (atstandard/full,/create-epicsbefore it)." Do not proceed to invent work items — a sprint plan that references stories which do not exist cannot be implemented. -
Scan design documents in
design/gdd/for additional context on the features those stories implement. Atworkflow: minimalthere are no per-system GDDs — usedesign/game-brief.mdinstead, and do not treat the absent GDDs as missing work. (Note:/sprint-planis optional atminimal— the brief's Build order already is the plan.) -
Check the risk register at
production/risk-register/if it exists. Like the milestone above, no skill writes it — entries are authored by hand from.claude/docs/templates/risk-register-entry.md. If the directory is absent, say so once ("no risk register — risks assessed from the sprint contents only") rather than skipping risk assessment silently.
Phase 2: Generate Output
For new:
Generate a sprint plan following this format and present it to the user. Do NOT ask to write yet — the gate phases run first and may require revisions before the file is written: the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4, spawned only in full review mode — skipped in lean/solo) and the QA plan check (Phase 5, all modes).
# Sprint [N] — [Start Date] to [End Date]
## Sprint Goal
[One sentence describing what this sprint achieves toward the milestone]
## Capacity
- Total days: [X]
- Buffer (20%): [Y days reserved for unplanned work]
- Available: [Z days]
## Tasks
### Must Have (Critical Path)
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|
### Should Have
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|
### Nice to Have
| ID | Task | Agent/Owner | Est. Days | Dependencies | Acceptance Criteria |
|----|------|-------------|-----------|-------------|-------------------|
## Carryover from Previous Sprint
| Task | Reason | New Estimate |
|------|--------|-------------|
## Risks
| Risk | Probability | Impact | Mitigation |
|------|------------|--------|------------|
## Dependencies on External Factors
- [List any external dependencies]
## Definition of Done for this Sprint
- [ ] All Must Have tasks completed
- [ ] All tasks pass acceptance criteria
- [ ] QA plan exists (`production/qa/qa-plan-sprint-[N].md`)
- [ ] All Logic/Integration stories have passing unit/integration tests
- [ ] Smoke check passed (`/smoke-check sprint`)
- [ ] QA sign-off report: APPROVED or APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS (`/team-qa sprint`)
- [ ] No S1 or S2 bugs in delivered features
- [ ] Design documents updated for any deviations
- [ ] Code reviewed and merged
For update:
Update an existing sprint plan:
- Read the most recent sprint plan from
production/sprints/. - Present the current story list with their current statuses from
production/sprint-status.yaml. - Ask the user what to change: stories to add, remove, reprioritize, or re-estimate. Use
AskUserQuestionto gather changes. - Apply the changes and re-present the full revised plan for review.
- Re-run the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) on the revised plan.
- Write the updated markdown plan and yaml together (same approval as
newmode).
Note: update mode does not reset story statuses. Stories already marked in-progress or done keep their status. Only backlog and ready-for-dev stories can be removed or reprioritized freely.
For status:
Generate a status report:
# Sprint [N] Status -- [Date]
## Progress: [X/Y tasks complete] ([Z%])
### Completed
| Task | Completed By | Notes |
|------|-------------|-------|
### In Progress
| Task | Owner | % Done | Blockers |
|------|-------|--------|----------|
### Not Started
| Task | Owner | At Risk? | Notes |
|------|-------|----------|-------|
### Blocked
| Task | Blocker | Owner of Blocker | ETA |
|------|---------|-----------------|-----|
## Burndown Assessment
[On track / Behind / Ahead]
[If behind: What is being cut or deferred]
## Emerging Risks
- [Any new risks identified this sprint]
Phase 3: Prepare Sprint Status File
After generating a new sprint plan, also prepare the production/sprint-status.yaml content.
This is the machine-readable source of truth for story status — read by
/sprint-status, /story-done, and /help without markdown parsing.
Do not write the yaml yet — hold it in context. The producer feasibility gate (Phase 4, full review mode only) may revise the story list; the QA plan check (Phase 5) runs in every mode. Both files are written together after Phase 5 in a single write approval.
Format:
# Auto-generated by /sprint-plan. Updated by /story-done and /dev-story.
# DO NOT edit manually — use /story-done to update story status.
#
# Status value mapping (yaml ↔ story file Status field):
# backlog ↔ Not Started
# ready-for-dev ↔ Ready
# in-progress ↔ In Progress
# review ↔ In Review
# done ↔ Complete
# blocked ↔ Blocked
sprint: [N]
goal: "[sprint goal]"
start: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
end: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
generated: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
updated: "[YYYY-MM-DD]"
stories:
- id: "[epic-story, e.g. 1-1]"
name: "[story name]"
file: "[production/epics/[epic-slug]/story-NNN-[slug].md]" # the real path, verbatim from the Glob above
priority: must-have # must-have | should-have | nice-to-have
status: ready-for-dev # backlog | ready-for-dev | in-progress | review | done | blocked
owner: ""
estimate_days: 0
blocker: ""
completed: ""
Initialize each story from the sprint plan's task tables:
- Must Have tasks →
priority: must-have,status: ready-for-dev - Should Have tasks →
priority: should-have,status: backlog - Nice to Have tasks →
priority: nice-to-have,status: backlog
For update: read the existing sprint-status.yaml, carry over statuses for
stories that haven't changed, add new stories, remove dropped ones.
Phase 4: Producer Feasibility Gate
Review mode check — apply before spawning PR-SPRINT:
solo→ skip. Note: "PR-SPRINT skipped — Solo mode." Proceed to Phase 5 (QA plan gate).lean→ skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "PR-SPRINT skipped — Lean mode." Proceed to Phase 5 (QA plan gate).full→ spawn as normal.
Before finalising the sprint plan, spawn producer via Agent using gate PR-SPRINT (.claude/docs/director-gates/pr-sprint.md).
Pass: proposed story list (titles, estimates, dependencies), total team capacity in hours/days, any carryover from the previous sprint, milestone constraints and deadline.
Present the producer's assessment.
If UNREALISTIC: revise the story selection (defer stories to Should Have or Nice to Have) and re-present the updated plan before asking for write approval.
If CONCERNS, use AskUserQuestion:
- Prompt: "Producer flagged concerns with this sprint plan. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Proceed as planned — I accept the risk[B] Adjust scope — defer some Should Have stories[C] Extend the sprint timeline
If [A]: proceed to write approval. If [B]: revise the story list, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval. If [C]: adjust sprint dates and capacity, re-present the updated plan, then proceed to write approval.
After handling the producer's verdict, ask: "May I write the sprint plan to production/sprints/sprint-[N].md and production/sprint-status.yaml?" If yes, write both files (creating directories as needed). Verdict: COMPLETE — sprint plan and status file created. If no: Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.
After writing, add:
Scope check: If this sprint includes stories added beyond the original epic scope, run
/scope-check [epic]to detect scope creep before implementation begins.
Phase 5: QA Plan Gate
Before closing the sprint plan, check whether a QA plan exists for this sprint.
Use Glob to look for production/qa/qa-plan-sprint-[N].md or any file in production/qa/ referencing this sprint number.
If a QA plan is found: note it in the sprint plan output — "QA Plan: [path]" — and proceed.
If no QA plan exists: do not silently proceed. Surface this explicitly:
"This sprint has no QA plan. A sprint plan without a QA plan means test requirements are undefined — developers won't know what 'done' looks like from a QA perspective, and the sprint cannot pass the Production → Polish gate without one.
Run
/qa-plan sprintnow, before starting any implementation. It takes one session and produces the test case requirements each story needs."
Use AskUserQuestion:
- Prompt: "No QA plan found for this sprint. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Run /qa-plan sprint now — I'll do that before starting implementation (Recommended)[B] Skip for now — I understand QA sign-off will be blocked at the Production → Polish gate
If [A]: close with "Sprint plan written. Run /qa-plan sprint next — then begin implementation."
If [B]: add a warning block to the sprint plan document:
> ⚠️ **No QA Plan**: This sprint was started without a QA plan. Run `/qa-plan sprint`
> before the last story is implemented. The Production → Polish gate requires a QA
> sign-off report, which requires a QA plan.
Phase 6: Next Steps
After the sprint plan is written and QA plan status is resolved:
/qa-plan sprint— required before implementation begins — defines test cases per story so developers implement against QA specs, not a blank slate/story-readiness [story-file]— validate a story is ready before starting it/dev-story [story-file]— begin implementing the first story/sprint-status— check progress mid-sprint/scope-check [epic]— verify no scope creep before implementation begins
Review mode configuration: All director gates (producer feasibility, QA review, code review) respect the project review mode, resolved by the Phase 0 chain (--review flag → modes.review_mode in project.yaml → production/review-mode.txt → the modes.rigor expansion, which yields lean at standard rigor and solo at minimal). For a new sprint with nothing configured, Phase 0 prompts for it and dual-writes the choice. The mode is one of:
lean— skip non-phase-gate director gates (default — fastest for solo dev)full— run all director gates as spawned sub-agentssolo— skip all gate spawning unconditionally (single developer, no review)
modes.review_mode in project.yaml is the primary source; production/review-mode.txt is the legacy fallback. Both are read by /sprint-plan, /story-readiness, /story-done, and other gate-using skills at startup.