Community

retro-facilitation

Open Agent Skill · productivity · works with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and compatible agents

Run and write software retros with useful insights and follow-through. Use whenever the user asks for a retrospective, sprint retro agenda, what went well / what to improve, retro notes, or how to facilitate a team retro.

View on GitHub

Retro Facilitation

Retros create change, not venting transcripts. Psychological safety first, few actions with owners second.

Facilitation flow (live)

  1. Set the frame (2 min): blameless, timebox, goal = 1–3 improvements.
  2. Collect data (5–10 min): silent writing then share (Start/Stop/Continue or Went well / Needs work / Puzzles).
  3. Cluster & vote (5 min): group themes; dot-vote top issues.
  4. Generate insights (10 min): ask "why" 1–2 times; avoid personal blame.
  5. Decide actions (5–10 min): specific, owned, due; fewer is better.
  6. Close (2 min): appreciate, confirm owners, park backlog ideas.

Output formats

Agenda (before the meeting)

# Retro agenda — <team> — <date>
**Timebox:** 45–60 min
**Prompt:** Start / Stop / Continue
**Materials:** board link, last retro actions
1. Check-in + prime directive
2. Review last actions
3. Gather …
4. Vote …
5. Discuss top 2
6. Actions + owners

Notes (after)

# Retro notes — <date>
## Went well
- …

## Needs improvement
- …

## Actions
- [ ] … — Owner: … — Due: …

## Parking lot
- …

Rules

  1. Actions must be testable ("add flaky-test quarantine doc") not vibes ("communicate better").
  2. Re-open last retro's actions first; unfinished items get honest status.
  3. Facilitator protects airtime; no single monologue dominates.
  4. Separate people problems (1:1 later) from system problems (retro).
  5. Cap new actions at three for a typical sprint retro.
  6. Do not invent team sentiment; if only sparse notes exist, mark gaps.

Edge cases

  • Remote/async retro: longer silent gather window; use threaded votes; still produce the same notes format.
  • Incident-heavy sprint: allow a short timeline share, then move to systems; link postmortem rather than redoing it.
  • Toxic blame risk: restate prime directive; convert accusations into process questions.
  • User only wants a board template: deliver columns + example sticky prompts without a fake discussion.