Back to Details

retro

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese
Turn a completed cycle into lessons the next cycle can actually use.
将已完成的工作周期转化为下一周期可实际运用的经验教训。

Goal

目标

retro
extracts durable learning from a work cycle without defending the artifact that produced it. A cycle can run, pass tests, and still be the wrong thing. The output is not a changelog or therapy note: it is a local, evidence-backed record of what worked, what misled the build, and what gate the next pass must clear.
Use 
retro
when the artifact is done, failed, disappointing, or ambiguous enough that the next agent needs the cycle's lessons more than its momentum.
retro
从工作周期中提取可长期复用的经验，无需为产出的成果辩护。一个周期可能顺利运行、通过测试，但最终产出的可能并非正确结果。输出内容不是变更日志或情绪记录：而是一份基于本地证据的记录，涵盖有效的实践、误导构建的因素，以及下一阶段必须跨越的质量门。
当成果已完成、失败、不尽人意或存在歧义，且下一阶段执行者更需要该周期的经验而非延续现有工作节奏时，请使用 
retro
。

Workflow

工作流程

  1. Read the original objective, final artifact, QA evidence, user complaints, and any local planning notes.
  2. Separate working assets from misleading progress: contracts, schemas, tests, services, vocabulary, and examples that earned reuse vs. UI, panels, scaffolds, or abstractions that only looked productive.
  3. Name each failure as an anti-pattern, not a mood.
  4. Convert repeated or high-impact failures into quality gates for the next pass.
  5. Convert vague user direction into architecture vocabulary a fresh agent can use.
  6. Write or refresh local docs for the cycle: a retro for lessons and a plan for next-cycle contracts, gates, and vocabulary.
  7. Verify that a from-scratch agent could avoid the same failure from those docs alone.
  1. 阅读原始目标、最终成果、QA证据、用户投诉以及所有本地规划记录。
  2. 区分有效资产与误导性进展：值得复用的合同、架构图、测试用例、服务、术语和示例，与看似高效实则无用的UI界面、面板、脚手架或抽象概念。
  3. 将每个失败定义为一种反模式，而非情绪化描述。
  4. 将反复出现或影响重大的失败转化为下一阶段的质量门。
  5. 将模糊的用户需求转化为新执行者可使用的架构术语。
  6. 撰写或更新该周期的本地文档：一份记录经验教训的复盘文档，以及一份包含下一阶段合同、质量门和通用术语的计划文档。
  7. 验证从零开始的执行者仅通过这些文档就能避免重蹈覆辙。

Rules

规则

  • Do not defend the artifact. If it missed the product, say what missed.
  • Do not write a changelog. File lists and effort summaries are not lessons.
  • Preserve negative corpus. Failed paths are training data.
  • Prefer hard gates over advice.
  • Cite evidence from the cycle: objective, file facts, QA output, screenshots, transcripts, diffs, or user feedback.
  • If the next agent cannot act on it, it is not a lesson yet.
  • Keep provenance local; shipped artifacts should not narrate their scars.
  • 无需为成果辩护。如果成果未达产品要求，直接说明问题所在。
  • 不要撰写变更日志。文件清单和工作量总结不属于经验教训。
  • 保留负面案例库。失败路径是重要的训练数据。
  • 优先设置硬性质量门，而非给出建议。
  • 引用周期中的证据：目标、文件事实、QA输出、截图、对话记录、代码差异或用户反馈。
  • 如果下一阶段执行者无法据此采取行动，则不能称之为经验教训。
  • 保留本地来源；已发布的成果无需记录其缺陷。

Verification

验证

Before finishing:
  1. Every lesson traces to observed cycle evidence.
  2. Every anti-pattern names a concrete failure mode and the gate that catches it.
  3. A fresh agent can tell what to preserve, what to discard, and what to test first without reading the whole old session.
完成前需确认：
  1. 每条经验教训都能追溯到周期中观察到的证据。
  2. 每个反模式都明确了具体的失败模式以及对应的质量门。
  3. 新执行者无需阅读整个旧周期的记录，就能明确应保留、丢弃的内容，以及优先测试的对象。