milestone-review
Generates a comprehensive milestone progress review including feature completeness, quality metrics, risk assessment, and go/no-go recommendation. Use at milestone checkpoints or when evaluating readiness for a milestone deadline.
pinned to #984023dupdated last month
Ask your AI client: “install skills/milestone-review”.
Requires the metahub MCP server installed in your client. Set up MCP.
mh install skills/milestone-reviewmetahub onboarded this repo on the author's behalf.
If you own github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios on GitHub, claim the listing to take over publishing. Your claim preserves the existing eval history and badges; only the curator label is replaced with verified-publisher on your next publish.
Stars
23,879
Last commit
last month
Latest release
published
- #ai-agents
- #ai-assisted-development
- #anthropic
- #claude
- #claude-code
- #game-design
- #game-development
- #gamedev
- #godot
- #indie-game-dev
- #unity
- #unreal-engine
About this skill
Pulled from SKILL.md at publish time.
Allowed tools
- Read
- Glob
- Grep
- Write
- Task
- AskUserQuestion
Automated checks the publisher passed at publish time — structure, docs, safety, and whether the artifact behaves as claimed.984023d· last month
Behavioral checks ran but aren't published for this artifact; the static checks above ran at publish time.
Documentation
8 passed1 warningHomepage or repository declaredwarn
No homepage or repository declared.
Add a "homepage" or "repository" field to SKILL.md.
Description quality
28 words · 230 chars — "Generates a comprehensive milestone progress review including feature completene…"
README is present and substantial
15,951 chars · 15 sections · 2 code blocks
Tags / topics declared
12 total — ai-agents, ai-assisted-development, anthropic, claude, claude-code, game-design (+6)
README has usage / example sections
found: Getting Started
Homepage / docs URL declared
no homepage declared (registry will use the repo URL) — info-only, not blocking
Description is substantive
Description is 28 words.
Documentation present and substantive
Documentation present (SKILL.md, 780 words).
Documentation shows usage
Documentation includes 1 code example.
Release history
1- releasecurrent984023dwarnlast month
Contents
Phase 0: Parse Arguments
Extract the milestone name (current or a specific name) and resolve the review mode (once, store for all gate spawns this run):
- If
--review [full|lean|solo]was passed → use that - Else read
production/review-mode.txt→ use that value - Else → default to
lean
See .claude/docs/director-gates.md for the full check pattern.
Phase 1: Load Milestone Data
Read the milestone definition from production/milestones/. If the argument is current, use the most recently modified milestone file.
Read all sprint reports for sprints within this milestone from production/sprints/.
Phase 2: Scan Codebase Health
- Scan for
TODO,FIXME,HACKmarkers that indicate incomplete work - Check the risk register at
production/risk-register/
Phase 3: Generate the Milestone Review
# Milestone Review: [Milestone Name]
## Overview
- **Target Date**: [Date]
- **Current Date**: [Today]
- **Days Remaining**: [N]
- **Sprints Completed**: [X/Y]
## Feature Completeness
### Fully Complete
| Feature | Acceptance Criteria | Test Status |
|---------|-------------------|-------------|
### Partially Complete
| Feature | % Done | Remaining Work | Risk to Milestone |
|---------|--------|---------------|------------------|
### Not Started
| Feature | Priority | Can Cut? | Impact of Cutting |
|---------|----------|----------|------------------|
## Quality Metrics
- **Open S1 Bugs**: [N] -- [List]
- **Open S2 Bugs**: [N]
- **Open S3 Bugs**: [N]
- **Test Coverage**: [X%]
- **Performance**: [Within budget? Details]
## Code Health
- **TODO count**: [N across codebase]
- **FIXME count**: [N]
- **HACK count**: [N]
- **Technical debt items**: [List critical ones]
## Risk Assessment
| Risk | Status | Impact if Realized | Mitigation Status |
|------|--------|-------------------|------------------|
## Velocity Analysis
- **Planned vs Completed** (across all sprints): [X/Y tasks = Z%]
- **Trend**: [Improving / Stable / Declining]
- **Adjusted estimate for remaining work**: [Days needed at current velocity]
## Scope Recommendations
### Protect (Must ship with milestone)
- [Feature and why]
### At Risk (May need to cut or simplify)
- [Feature and risk]
### Cut Candidates (Can defer without compromising milestone)
- [Feature and impact of cutting]
## Go/No-Go Assessment
**Recommendation**: [GO / CONDITIONAL GO / NO-GO]
**Conditions** (if conditional):
- [Condition 1 that must be met]
- [Condition 2 that must be met]
**Rationale**: [Explanation of the recommendation]
## Action Items
| # | Action | Owner | Deadline |
|---|--------|-------|----------|
Phase 3b: Producer Risk Assessment
Review mode check — apply before spawning PR-MILESTONE:
solo→ skip. Note: "PR-MILESTONE skipped — Solo mode." Present the Go/No-Go section without a producer verdict.lean→ skip (not a PHASE-GATE). Note: "PR-MILESTONE skipped — Lean mode." Present the Go/No-Go section without a producer verdict.full→ spawn as normal.
Before generating the Go/No-Go recommendation, spawn producer via Task using gate PR-MILESTONE (.claude/docs/director-gates.md).
Pass: milestone name and target date, current completion percentage, blocked story count, velocity data from sprint reports (if available), list of cut candidates.
Present the producer's assessment inline within the Go/No-Go section. The producer's verdict (ON TRACK / AT RISK / OFF TRACK) informs the overall recommendation.
If OFF TRACK, use AskUserQuestion before generating the recommendation:
- Prompt: "Producer verdict: OFF TRACK. The milestone is in jeopardy. This review will recommend NO-GO. How do you want to proceed?"
- Options:
[A] Accept NO-GO — generate the full review with that recommendation[B] Override to CONDITIONAL GO — I'll document the accepted risks myself[C] Stop — I want to address blockers before generating the review
If AT RISK, use AskUserQuestion:
- Prompt: "Producer verdict: AT RISK. Milestone may slip. How should the Go/No-Go section be framed?"
- Options:
[A] CONDITIONAL GO — include producer's conditions in the review[B] NO-GO — conditions cannot be met in time[C] GO — I accept the risk and want to proceed
Do not issue a GO against an OFF TRACK verdict unless the user explicitly selects [B] above.
Phase 4: Save Review
Present the review to the user.
Ask: "May I write this to production/milestones/[milestone-name]-review.md?"
If yes, write the file, creating the directory if needed. Verdict: COMPLETE — milestone review saved.
If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.
Phase 5: Next Steps
- Run
/gate-checkfor a formal phase gate verdict if this milestone marks a development phase boundary. - Run
/sprint-planto adjust the next sprint based on the scope recommendations above.
Reviews
No reviews yet. Be the first.
Related
Verification Before Completion
Evidence before assertions, always
Writing Plans
Turn specs into phased implementation plans
Test-Driven Development
Red → green → refactor discipline for any feature or bugfix
mh install skills/milestone-review