dew-debrief

Facilitate structured retrospectives across six dew development workflow stages.

5|1|Updated Mar 1, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/jkerdels/dew-plugin --skill dew-debrief
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: dew-debrief
Source: https://github.com/jkerdels/dew-plugin/tree/main/skills/dew-debrief
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/jkerdels/dew-plugin --skill dew-debrief

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This skill helps teams conduct a rigorous post-mortem of a completed dew development cycle, turning observations into specific, actionable configuration changes for the next run.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Structured retrospective facilitation: Guides collaborative inquiry across Discover, Design, Demonstrate, Develop, Document, and the Debrief stage to surface what worked and what didn’t.
  • Root-cause and hypothesis testing: Pushes beyond surface explanations by identifying likely causes (skill prompts, workflow design, communication, tooling, or problem complexity) and validating them with falsifiable hypotheses.
  • Knowledge institutionalization: Prepares and records “lessons learned” directly into the relevant SKILL.md files, so improvements persist into future cycles.
  • Optional DAG evidence review: Uses the project dependency graph to quantify completion, backtracks/invalidations, stage alignment, and remaining/pending nodes.

Quick Start

Use the dew-debrief skill after a completed Discover → Design → Demonstrate → Develop → Document cycle to generate a debrief and write confirmed lessons back into the participating skill configurations.

Frequently Asked Questions about dew-debrief

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I conduct a root cause analysis for friction and backtracks in a development cycle?

Root cause analysis for development friction is facilitated by a structured retrospective across six workflow stages, validating likely causes like skill prompts or tooling with falsifiable hypotheses. It reads stage artifacts and optionally reviews DAG evidence to quantify backtracks.

How do I write retrospective lessons into SKILL.md files to improve engineering processes?

Writing retrospective lessons into SKILL.md files institutionalizes knowledge by recording confirmed findings directly into participating skill configurations. This persists improvements into future cycles by updating the configuration with specific, actionable changes.

When do I need a structured retrospective for AI-assisted development workflows?

A structured retrospective is needed after a completed Discover, Design, Demonstrate, Develop, and Document cycle where the team requires causal analysis of handoff failures. It guides collaborative inquiry to surface what worked and what didn't across all stages.

Can I use DAG evidence to quantify stage alignment and backtracks in a development cycle?

DAG evidence can be optionally reviewed to quantify completion, backtracks, invalidations, stage alignment, and remaining nodes. It provides dependency graph data to support the retrospective and validate root causes of workflow friction.

Does this retrospective process work without existing stage artifacts?

This retrospective process requires existing Discover, Design, Demonstrate, Develop, and Document artifacts to function correctly. It reads state and stage artifacts to synthesize skill-specific findings and write confirmed lessons back into the configurations.