git:20260922.2ef78c3 to git:20260922.1cd6ea6

---

name: dough-execution-retrospective

description: >-

Reviews planned, completed planless quick, or quick-to-planned execution against

original intent, aggregate commits, current whole-product architecture, and tests,

including after cleanup. Use for execution retrospective, product review, or backlog

recommendations from current/supplied history. Supports `--skip-process`, `--skip-product`,

and project `skipProcessRetrospective` preference. May plan corrections, record process

findings in `DearDough.md` (500-line warning, 1,000-line ceiling, recoverable lower-priority

replacement on overflow), and recommend product work; never implements findings.

---

# Review an execution

Review implementation, process, and product learning by default. Return evidence and needed

correction plans; do not implement, commit, push, or change the backlog. Leave closure to

[dough-story-wrap-up](../dough-story-wrap-up/SKILL.md).

## Select reviews

Select reviews before focus-specific actions or context, including log-location resolution.

Independent, combinable `--skip-process` and `--skip-product` omit their analysis, suggestions,

and destination access/writes. Unresolved process selection excludes that focus too. Other

reviews retain their authority, implementation planning, and direction consideration.

Read this project's optional `<established-planning-directory>/open-dough.json` (default:

`<project-root>/.planning/open-dough.json`), not a skill-local or other project's file.

Expect a JSON object with optional boolean `skipProcessRetrospective`: missing file/key or

`false` enables process; `true` skips. Ignore unknown keys; never create, rewrite, or repair it.

Explicit process selection overrides storage, including errors: `--skip-process` skips;

an include-process request enables without a new flag. Clarify contradictory instructions.

Otherwise unreadable/malformed/non-object JSON or non-boolean recognized values leave selection

unresolved: report error, omit process analysis/log access, and continue independent reviews.

## Resolve this project's context

Start from a capability/story phrase, correction plan, commit, or current/supplied conversation.

Resolve project navigation, focused tests, cleanup lifecycle, relevant plan/story locations and

statuses, and direction; backlog conventions only for dependent product recommendations.

Missing decision-relevant context stops that path with a named gap, not invented conventions.

Preserve worktree changes. Separate report artifacts require a request; allowed writes are

correction plans and process recording below. A complete correction plan needs no seed.

Quick inputs follow the recovery rules below.

Before residue assessment, read [refactoring](../dough-post-change-refactor/SKILL.md) and its

checks; use the smell definitions on the aggregate result without editing. For needed correction

planning, load [slice planning](../dough-slice-planning/SKILL.md#require-understood-planning-input)

and follow its bounded-input, proof, sizing, and destination gates. Load [backlog guidance](../dough-product-backlog/SKILL.md)

only for dependent enabled recommendations.

## Recover one execution

Search conversation, supplied history, current planning, then Git history. Establish whether

work was planned, explicitly planless, quick-to-planned, or planned with normal cleanup.

File absence establishes none of these. Recover original intent before judging implementation:

- **Planned:** recover the earliest execution-ready plan, story/correction input and outcome,

then later changes supported by approval or new evidence. Partial references and removed

plans suffice when history identifies them; removed plans remain planned executions.

- **Quick:** require conversational evidence of explicit planless selection. Recover canonical

goal, boundaries, examples, promised proof, approved changes, related changes/commits, and

available proof. Use current chat when sufficient, otherwise supplied transcript; invent no

historical plan or substitute execution record.

- **Quick-to-planned:** recover conversational quick selection/attempt and the ordinary

same-source remaining-work plan. Preserve compatible attributable quick work/proof as such,

not earlier planned slices; recover later slices/changes normally. Both parts form one execution.

Completion requires every planned slice done (history proves deleted plans), or quick

conversation/repository proof of delivered outcome. Quick-to-planned needs a completed remaining

plan plus quick/planned proof covering the original outcome without gaps or assumed repeated work.

Missing kind, continuity, contract, completion, or proof limits dependent conclusions only.

Two equally plausible executions need user selection; continue independently supported review.

Manifest each related SHA with a reason from story/plan, retained published revisions, message, diff, or transcript. When those published revisions exist, they are the related set; do not attribute a whole-trunk range, interleaved sibling work, or a rewritten unpublished SHA (use its published replacement).

Inspect nearby/intervening commits and exclude unrelated work with reasons.

Ambiguous attribution limits claims; planning-only commits are provenance.

Use a net diff only for an uncontaminated range, otherwise selected patches together and files at the last related implementation commit.

Review history read-only, excluding later work.

## Consider near-future direction

Read direction once, prioritizing alignment/digression questions and explaining exceptions (e.g.

urgent fixes). If absent, report unassessed alignment and continue; never invent, propose, or edit it.

Route defects to corrections, process learning to findings, and product learning/priorities to advice.

Users own constraint/outcome changes. Historical contracts stand; later direction governs future work.

## Review the outcome

Compare original intent, boundaries, approved changes, and promised proof to aggregate code,

tests, docs, and proof. Assess only completed slices of unfinished plans; unexecuted work is not

missing behavior, nor its temporary predecessor obsolete. Findings need evidence and plausible

impact: bugs, regressions, drift/disputes, refactoring residue, architecture, or test coverage/cost.

Assess whole-product domain responsibilities, dependencies, and representations, including relevant

untouched code. Check coherent rules versus successive-example cases and explain impact, such as

divergent rules or coordinated edits. Delivery sequence cannot justify boundaries; helpers alone

cannot prove cohesion. Apply [ADR awareness](../dough-adr-awareness/SKILL.md) with human-owned conflicts.

Older weaknesses may need correction; only provenance establishes an execution regression.

Identify whether E2E tests drove development, then assess the whole suite, including older tests

and executions adding no E2E tests, under [behavioral test guidance](../dough-post-change-refactor/references/refactor-checks.md#tests-as-behavioral-documentation).

Ground retention, detail downgrades, and consolidation in coverage/cost; preserve journey

information and integration proof. Use project testing guidance or the shared black-box fallback.

Whole-suite assessment needs no full run; use focused read-only checks to confirm/dismiss findings.

Inspect worked-around/replaced branches, flags, callers, fixtures, compatibility paths, overlapping/

obsolete-internal tests, and historical documentation. Removed temporary behavior warrants negative

proof/docs only when absence remains required. Exclude cosmetic/speculative/unsupported findings,

duplicate symptoms, and approved decisions mislabelled as drift. Before planning removal of a

disputed restriction, use [plan-conflict handoff](../dough-execute-plan/references/execution-decisions.md#resolve-a-disputed-plan-restriction).

Preserve genuine constraints; await human resolution of disputed corrections while independent

review continues. Plan compliance alone does not settle justification.

## Reconcile findings with current truth

Recheck findings against current revision/worktree; report later fixes and deduplicate by root

cause. Current evidence bounds corrections, including beyond the old footprint, while preserving

[scope and promises](../dough-story-refinement/references/planning.md#examples-and-constraints).

No findings means unchanged plans; broader review grants no new feature promises.

Give suite cleanup explicit correction ownership, including older redundant tests. For consolidation,

name surviving meaningful coverage/integration proof (retained E2E may suffice). For detail downgrades,

require replacement unit coverage before narrowing/removing E2E tests. Plan cleanup; do not perform it.

- **Unfinished plan:** amend in place; retain completed evidence/resume history and numbering.

Put corrections before remaining work, revise overlapping slices instead of duplicating them,

and record findings/manifest as concise learning when the project format supports it.

- **Planless, completion unresolved:** return evidence and exact completion/proof/attribution gaps.

Original unfinished work is not yet a completed-execution correction; reconstruct no plan or

create a correction destination until the completed execution boundary is established.

- **Completed execution:** create one follow-up through slice planning in the established location:

original contract/manifest as provenance; current findings as scope/evidence; bounded outcome,

concepts, impact, preserved behavior, and focused proof. Keep historical promises/attribution intact.

Changing promises/constraints or findings that cannot form one bounded correction need user decision.

Only the designated writer changes the plan when two authorized reviews cover one execution;

the other returns evidence. Continue enabled reviews; a separate request executes the correction, and [dough-execute-plan](../dough-execute-plan/SKILL.md) publishes it through [increment and repair publication](../dough-execute-plan/references/trunk-publication.md#publish-an-execution-increment-or-repair). This review does not publish.

## Review process only from a real record

Use direction and a sufficient conversation/transcript to identify waste, rule-induced churn,

missing stops, disproved sizing/decomposition, digression, and useful practices. Assess instruction

and context usability, including this review's avoidable rereading, duplication, and reconstruction.

Separate necessary investigation, observation, and inferred cost/cause. Cite recorded token counts

or repeated work with qualified cost; brevity/skipped investigation alone proves no gain. Insufficient

records limit conclusions: invent no events, edit no guidance, require no measurements or recursive

review. Process proposals stay outside correction plans.

### Record supported process findings

## Review product learning

Inspect direction and relevant queue entries/stories; unrelated urgent fixes need no queue survey.

Preserve priorities; connect supported learning to recommendations or reasoned no-change. Unread

entries stay unvalidated; inspirations are hypotheses. Unknown beneficiaries/outcomes warrant an

exploration proposal, not discovery/decomposition. Missing conventions leave conclusions provisional:

report gaps, invent no files/learning, and continue independent reviews.

Send recommendations, proposals, and unresolved choices to [story wrap-up](../dough-story-wrap-up/SKILL.md);

backlog/story edits require that workflow or separately requested [maintenance](../dough-product-backlog/SKILL.md).

Leave disputed goals/scope, conflicting priorities, and unknown beneficiaries/outcomes unresolved.

## Report

Report work identity/completion, provenance, manifest/boundary, impact-ordered findings or `none`,

and evidence limits. Classify planning as amended, new, read-only, unchanged, or unavailable pending

execution-boundary evidence. Report enabled process proposals and product advice/reasoned no-change;

unresolved process selection reports its error only. Distinguish evidence from hypotheses and

```text

!!!!!!!!!! DEVELOPER ATTENTION REQUIRED !!!!!!!!!!

<the overlooked item, its impact, and the response needed>

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

```