All checks were successful
Build App / compute-version (push) Successful in 2s
Build App / build-macos (push) Successful in 2m47s
Build Container / build-container (push) Successful in 9m0s
Build App / build-linux (push) Successful in 4m41s
Build App / build-windows (push) Successful in 5m33s
Build App / create-tag (push) Successful in 3s
Build App / sync-to-github (push) Successful in 10s
The mission-control (Flight Control) project is being closed upstream. This embeds the project files directly in the repo under container/mission-control/, bakes them into the Docker image at /opt/mission-control, and copies them into place at container startup instead of git cloning from GitHub. Also adds missing osc52-clipboard, audio-shim, and triple-c-sso-refresh to the programmatic Docker build context in image.rs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
185 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
185 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: mission-debrief
|
|
description: Post-mission retrospective for outcomes assessment and methodology improvement. Use after a mission completes or aborts to capture overall lessons learned.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Mission Debrief
|
|
|
|
Perform comprehensive post-mission retrospective and methodology assessment.
|
|
|
|
## Prerequisites
|
|
|
|
- Project must be initialized with `/init-project` (`.flightops/ARTIFACTS.md` must exist)
|
|
- A mission must have at least one completed or aborted flight before debriefing
|
|
|
|
## Workflow
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Context Loading
|
|
|
|
1. **Identify the target project**
|
|
- Read `projects.md` to find the project's path
|
|
|
|
2. **Verify project is initialized**
|
|
- Check if `{target-project}/.flightops/ARTIFACTS.md` exists
|
|
- **If missing**: STOP and tell the user to run `/init-project` first
|
|
- Do not proceed without the artifact configuration
|
|
|
|
3. **Read the artifact configuration**
|
|
- Read `{target-project}/.flightops/ARTIFACTS.md` for artifact locations and formats
|
|
|
|
4. **Load mission documentation**
|
|
- Read the mission for original outcome, success criteria, and constraints
|
|
- Read ALL flight documents for objectives and results
|
|
- Read ALL flight debriefs for per-flight lessons learned
|
|
- Read flight logs for execution details
|
|
|
|
5. **Load project context**
|
|
- Read the target project's `README.md` and `CLAUDE.md`
|
|
- Understand what was built during this mission
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Crew Debrief Interviews
|
|
|
|
Read `{target-project}/.flightops/agent-crews/mission-debrief.md` for crew definitions and prompts (fall back to defaults at `.claude/skills/init-project/defaults/agent-crews/mission-debrief.md`).
|
|
|
|
**Validate structure**: The phase file MUST contain `## Crew`, `## Interaction Protocol`, and `## Prompts` sections with fenced code blocks. If the file exists but is malformed, STOP and tell the user: "Phase file `mission-debrief.md` is missing required sections. Either fix it manually or re-run `/init-project` to reset to defaults."
|
|
|
|
#### Architect Interview
|
|
1. **Spawn an Architect agent** in the target project context (Task tool, `subagent_type: "general-purpose"`)
|
|
- Provide the "Debrief Interview" prompt from the mission-debrief phase file's Prompts section
|
|
- The Architect reviews architectural evolution across all flights, pattern consistency, and structural health
|
|
- The Architect provides structured debrief input
|
|
|
|
#### Human Interview
|
|
Interview the crew to capture qualitative insights that documents alone cannot reveal.
|
|
|
|
##### Flight Log Clarifications
|
|
Surface specific observations from flight logs and ask for context:
|
|
- Anomalies or deviations noted in logs — what caused them?
|
|
- Decisions made during execution — what drove those choices?
|
|
- Blockers or delays — were these predictable in hindsight?
|
|
- Workarounds implemented — should these become standard practice?
|
|
|
|
##### Mission Control Experience
|
|
For the human(s) who served as mission control:
|
|
- "What was your experience coordinating this mission?"
|
|
- "Were there moments of confusion or uncertainty about status?"
|
|
- "Did the flight/leg structure help or hinder your oversight?"
|
|
- "What information was missing when you needed it?"
|
|
|
|
##### Project-Specific Feedback
|
|
- "What surprised you most during this mission?"
|
|
- "What would you do differently if starting over?"
|
|
- "Are there project-specific conventions that should be documented?"
|
|
- "Did any tools, libraries, or patterns prove particularly valuable or problematic?"
|
|
|
|
##### Agentic Orchestration Feedback (if applicable)
|
|
If the mission used automated orchestration (LLM agents executing legs):
|
|
- "How well did handoffs between agents work?"
|
|
- "Were there failures in agent coordination or context transfer?"
|
|
- "Did agents make decisions that required human correction?"
|
|
- "What guardrails or checkpoints would have helped?"
|
|
- "Was the level of autonomy appropriate for the tasks?"
|
|
|
|
**Note**: Adapt questions based on what the flight logs and artifacts reveal. Surface specific examples rather than asking in the abstract.
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Outcome Assessment (synthesize Architect + human input)
|
|
|
|
#### Success Criteria Evaluation
|
|
For each success criterion:
|
|
- Was it met? Partially met? Not met?
|
|
- What evidence supports this assessment?
|
|
- If not met, what blocked it?
|
|
|
|
#### Overall Outcome
|
|
- Did the mission achieve its stated outcome?
|
|
- Was the outcome still the right goal by the end?
|
|
- What value was delivered to stakeholders?
|
|
|
|
### Phase 4: Flight Analysis
|
|
|
|
#### Flight Summary
|
|
For each flight:
|
|
- Status (landed/completed/aborted)
|
|
- Key accomplishments
|
|
- Major challenges
|
|
|
|
#### Flight Patterns
|
|
- Which flights went smoothly? Why?
|
|
- Which flights struggled? Why?
|
|
- Were there common issues across flights?
|
|
|
|
### Phase 5: Process Analysis
|
|
|
|
#### Planning Effectiveness
|
|
- Was the initial flight plan accurate?
|
|
- How many flights were added/removed/changed?
|
|
- Were estimates reasonable?
|
|
|
|
#### Execution Patterns
|
|
- What worked well in execution?
|
|
- What friction points emerged?
|
|
- Were the right artifacts being created?
|
|
|
|
#### Methodology Assessment
|
|
- Did the mission/flight/leg hierarchy work for this project?
|
|
- Were briefings and debriefs valuable?
|
|
- What would you change about the process?
|
|
|
|
### Phase 6: Knowledge Capture
|
|
|
|
#### Lessons Learned
|
|
- Technical lessons (architecture, patterns, tools)
|
|
- Process lessons (planning, execution, communication)
|
|
- Domain lessons (business logic, requirements)
|
|
|
|
#### Reusable Patterns
|
|
- What patterns emerged that could be templated?
|
|
- What conventions should be documented?
|
|
|
|
#### Documentation Updates
|
|
- Does CLAUDE.md need updates?
|
|
- Does README need updates?
|
|
- Are there new runbooks or guides needed?
|
|
|
|
### Phase 7: Generate Debrief
|
|
|
|
Create the mission debrief artifact using the format defined in `.flightops/ARTIFACTS.md`.
|
|
|
|
### Phase 8: Mission Status Transition
|
|
|
|
If the mission is not already marked as `completed` or `aborted`, update the mission artifact's status to `completed`.
|
|
|
|
## Guidelines
|
|
|
|
### Holistic View
|
|
Look at the mission as a whole, not just individual flights. Identify patterns and systemic issues.
|
|
|
|
### Stakeholder Perspective
|
|
Frame outcomes in terms stakeholders care about. Did we deliver what was promised?
|
|
|
|
### Honest Assessment
|
|
Be candid about what didn't work. The debrief is for learning, not for blame.
|
|
|
|
### Actionable Insights
|
|
Every lesson should have a "so what?" — how should future missions be different?
|
|
|
|
### Methodology Feedback
|
|
This is the best time to identify improvements to Flight Control itself.
|
|
|
|
### Interview Integration
|
|
Weave interview insights throughout the debrief, not as a separate section. Crew perspectives should inform:
|
|
- Why certain outcomes were achieved or missed
|
|
- Root causes behind process friction
|
|
- Context that flight logs alone cannot capture
|
|
- Recommendations that reflect lived experience, not just document analysis
|
|
|
|
## Output
|
|
|
|
Create the debrief artifact using the location and format defined in `.flightops/ARTIFACTS.md`.
|
|
|
|
After creating the debrief, summarize:
|
|
1. Overall mission outcome assessment
|
|
2. Top 3 things that went well
|
|
3. Top 3 things to improve
|
|
4. Recommended methodology changes
|