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