Scope Check

This skill is read-only — it reports findings but writes no files.

Compares original planned scope against current state to detect, quantify, and triage scope creep.

Argument:

$ARGUMENTS[0]

— feature name, sprint number, or milestone name.

---

Phase 1: Find the Original Plan

Locate the baseline scope document for the given argument:

• Feature name → read

  design/gdd/[feature].md

  or matching file in

  design/

• Sprint number (e.g.,

  sprint-3

  ) → read

  production/sprints/sprint-03.md

  or similar
• Milestone → read

  production/milestones/[name].md

If the document is not found, report the missing file and stop. Do not proceed without a baseline to compare against.

---

Phase 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 (

  git log --oneline --since=[start-date]

  )
• Check for TODO/FIXME comments that indicate unfinished scope additions
• Check active sprint plan if the feature is mid-sprint

---

Phase 3: Compare Original vs Current Scope

Produce the comparison report:

## 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 | Source | 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]

---

Phase 4: Verdict

Assign a canonical verdict based on net scope change:

Net Change	Verdict	Meaning
≤10%	PASS	On Track — within acceptable variance
10–25%	CONCERNS	Minor Creep — manageable with targeted cuts
25–50%	FAIL	Significant Creep — must cut or formally extend timeline
>50%	FAIL	Out of Control — stop, re-plan, escalate to producer

Output the verdict prominently:

**Scope Verdict: [PASS / CONCERNS / FAIL]**
Net change: [+X%] — [On Track / Minor Creep / Significant Creep / Out of Control]

---

Phase 5: Next Steps

After presenting the report, offer concrete follow-up:

• PASS → no action required. Suggest re-running before next milestone.
• CONCERNS → offer to identify the 2–3 additions with best cut ratio. Reference

  /sprint-plan update

  to formally re-scope.
• FAIL → recommend escalating to producer. Reference

  /sprint-plan update

  for re-planning or

  /estimate

  to re-baseline timeline.

Always end with:

"Run

/scope-check [name]

again after cuts are made to verify the verdict improves."

---

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 player experience over nice-to-haves
• Always quantify scope changes — "it feels bigger" is not actionable, "+35% items" is