New or updated sprint plan from the current milestone, completed work, and available capacity.
复制下面这句话,粘贴给 Claude Code、Codex、Cursor 等 AI 编程工具,它会读取安装说明并在你确认后完成安装。
请阅读 https://ai.atlankj.com/install/asset/gh-sprint-plan-85dbf34c8bba ,按照其中的说明把「sprint-plan」安装到你(当前 AI 工具)中。执行前先告诉我将运行的命令和写入的位置,等我确认。
查看 AI 将读取的安装说明正在读取 GitHub 原文…
内容来自 GitHub 原始文件,由原作者维护。在 GitHub 查看
!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.
!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.
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):
--review
flag, no modes.review_mode in project.yaml, no production/review-mode.txt)
and this is a new sprint, do not silently take the step-4 lean default
— instead use AskUserQuestion:
[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 spawningmodes.review_mode in project.yaml (primary; add the modes: block if absent) AND write production/review-mode.txt (legacy fallback). Say: "Review mode set to [mode] and saved to project.yaml (and production/review-mode.txt)."new
sprint with nothing configured, that is the lean default).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?"
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-stories writes them and where /dev-story looks for them. Plan
from the ones marked Ready. 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-stories first (at standard/full, /create-epics before 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. At workflow: minimal there are no
per-system GDDs — use design/game-brief.md instead, and do not treat the
absent GDDs as missing work. (Note: /sprint-plan is optional at
minimal — 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.
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:
production/sprints/.production/sprint-status.yaml.AskUserQuestion to gather changes.new mode).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]
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:
priority: must-have, status: ready-for-devpriority: should-have, status: backlogpriority: nice-to-have, status: backlogFor update: read the existing sprint-status.yaml, carry over statuses for
stories that haven't changed, add new stories, remove dropped ones.
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:
[A] Proceed as planned — I accept the risk[B] Adjust scope — defer some Should Have stories[C] Extend the sprint timelineIf [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.
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:
[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 gateIf [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.
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 beginsReview 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.