scope-check

name: scope-check type: workflow description: "Analyzes a feature or sprint for scope creep by comparing current scope against the original plan, flagging additions and recommending cuts. Use when a sprint feels bloated or when the user mentions scope creep, scope check, or feature bloat." argument-hint: "[feature-name or sprint-N]" user-invocable: true allowed-tools: Read, Glob, Grep context: | !git diff --stat HEAD~20 2>/dev/null effort: 3 when_to_use: "Use when a sprint or feature feels bloated, when scope has grown beyond the original plan, or when the user mentions scope creep, feature bloat, or scope check."

When this skill is invoked:

1. Read the original plan — Find the relevant document:

   • If a feature name: read the design doc from design/docs/
   • If a sprint number: read the sprint plan from production/sprints/
   • If a milestone: read the milestone definition from production/milestones/

2. Read the current state — Check what has actually been implemented or is in progress:

   • Scan the codebase for files related to the feature/sprint
   • Read git log for commits related to this work
   • Check for TODO comments that indicate unfinished scope additions

3. Compare original vs current scope:

   ## Scope Check: [Feature/Sprint Name]
   Generated: [Date]
   
   ### Original Scope
   [List of items from the original plan]
   
   ### Current Scope
   [List of items currently implemented or in progress]
   
   ### Scope Additions (not in original plan)
   | Addition | Who Added | When | Justified? | Effort |
   |----------|-----------|------|------------|--------|
   | [item] | [commit/person] | [date] | [Yes/No/Unclear] | [S/M/L] |
   
   ### Scope Removals (in original but dropped)
   | Removed Item | Reason | Impact |
   |-------------|--------|--------|
   | [item] | [why removed] | [what's affected] |
   
   ### Bloat Score
   - Original items: [N]
   - Current items: [N]
   - Items added: [N] (+[X]%)
   - Items removed: [N]
   - Net scope change: [+/-N] ([X]%)
   
   ### Risk Assessment
   - **Schedule Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
   - **Quality Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
   - **Integration Risk**: [Low/Medium/High] — [explanation]
   
   ### Recommendations
   1. **Cut**: [Items that should be removed to stay on schedule]
   2. **Defer**: [Items that can move to a future sprint/version]
   3. **Keep**: [Additions that are genuinely necessary]
   4. **Flag**: [Items that need a decision from producer/creative-director]
   

4. Output the scope check with a clear verdict:

   • On Track: Scope within 10% of original
   • Minor Creep: 10-25% scope increase — manageable with adjustments
   • Significant Creep: 25-50% scope increase — need to cut or extend timeline
   • Out of Control: >50% scope increase — stop and re-plan

Rules

• Scope creep is additions without corresponding cuts or timeline extensions
• Not all additions are bad — some are discovered requirements. But they must be acknowledged and accounted for.
• When recommending cuts, prioritize preserving the core user experience over nice-to-haves
• Always quantify scope changes — "it feels bigger" is not actionable, "+35% items" is

Protocol

• Question: Reads feature name, sprint number, or milestone from argument
• Options: Skip
• Decision: Skip — findings are advisory
• Draft: Scope check report shown in conversation only
• Approval: Skip — read-only; no files written

Output

Deliver exactly:

• Scope delta: +X% items vs original plan (quantified, not subjective)
• Additions list: new items not in original plan, each tagged as discovered requirement or gold-plating
• Recommended cuts: specific items to remove to restore original scope (or "None needed")
• Verdict: ON TRACK / MINOR CREEP / SIGNIFICANT CREEP / OUT OF CONTROL — RE-PLAN