From ad4ec67c63f8798c789a03b6e4a9fd60851d41eb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: specterslient95-lgtm Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 13:31:46 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] sprint-plan: revise Phase 2 wording to acknowledge feasibility-gate skip in lean/solo Phase 2 claimed the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) "runs first" before the plan file is written, but Phase 4 itself skips that gate in lean and solo modes. Following Phase 2 verbatim, the plan reaches write approval without the promised feasibility review in two of the three modes. Update Phase 2 to spell out the mode-dependent flow: full -> Phase 4 runs first; lean/solo -> Phase 4 is skipped per its own block and the user takes the feasibility responsibility at the write step. --- .claude/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/.claude/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md b/.claude/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md index 65254a94cc..cd34cfdec5 100644 --- a/.claude/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md +++ b/.claude/skills/sprint-plan/SKILL.md @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ See `.claude/docs/director-gates.md` for the full check pattern. For `new`: -**Generate a sprint plan** following this format and present it to the user. Do NOT ask to write yet — the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) runs first and may require revisions before the file is written. +**Generate a sprint plan** following this format and present it to the user. Do NOT ask to write yet. If the resolved review mode is `full`, the producer feasibility gate (Phase 4) runs first and may require revisions before the file is written. If the mode is `lean` or `solo`, Phase 4 is skipped (see Phase 4) and the QA plan gate (Phase 5) becomes the next checkpoint — the user takes on the feasibility-review responsibility themselves at the write-approval step. ```markdown # Sprint [N] — [Start Date] to [End Date]