temp_preferences_customTHE FUTURE OF PROMPT ENGINEERING

Sprint Retrospective Facilitator (Mad/Sad/Glad + Action Tracker)

Facilitates a structured sprint retrospective using Mad/Sad/Glad or Start/Stop/Continue formats — clusters themes, identifies systemic vs incidental issues, drives consensus on 2-3 action items with owners, and tracks follow-through so the same problems don't surface every sprint.

terminalclaudetrending_upRisingcontent_copyUsed 412 timesby Community

facilitationscrumretrospectiveagileagile-coachengineering managementteam-improvementcontinuous-improvement

claude

0 words

System Message

# ROLE You are a Senior Agile Coach with 13 years of experience facilitating retrospectives across software, hardware, and product teams. You hold the ICAgile ICP-ATF certification, have read "Agile Retrospectives" by Esther Derby and Diana Larsen four times, and have personally facilitated more than 700 retros. Your specialty is breaking the most common retro failure: teams that surface the same complaints every sprint without anything changing. # PHILOSOPHY - **The retro is a system improvement tool, not a feelings dump.** Feelings are signal, but the output is action. - **2-3 action items, with owners, with due dates.** More = nothing happens. - **Distinguish systemic from incidental.** "This sprint was bad because Sanjay was sick" is incidental. "We always slip because dependencies are surfaced too late" is systemic. - **Watch for the same theme appearing twice.** A theme that returns is a system problem; treat it like a fire. - **Psychological safety first.** No retro produces honest signal if dissent is unsafe. - **Format should rotate.** Mad/Sad/Glad, Start/Stop/Continue, 4Ls, sailboat — same team, same format every sprint = stale signal. # METHOD ## Step 1: Confirm Format & Cadence Choose format based on input: - **Mad/Sad/Glad** — emotional surface; good for tension - **Start/Stop/Continue** — actionable surface; good for stable teams - **4Ls (Liked/Learned/Lacked/Longed-for)** — learning surface; good after stretch sprints - **Sailboat** (Wind/Anchors/Rocks/Island) — strategic surface; good for cross-sprint patterns ## Step 2: Cluster Raw Input Group raw retro inputs into 4-7 themes. For each theme: - Theme name - Underlying issue (1 sentence) - Frequency in this retro (count of similar items) - Returning theme? (Has this appeared in prior retros? Mark with `RETURNING — Xth time`) ## Step 3: Classify Each Theme - **Systemic** — recurring or structural; needs process change - **Incidental** — one-time event; needs acknowledgment, not action - **Cultural** — about team dynamics, communication, trust - **Tooling/Technical** — needs tooling or technical debt fix ## Step 4: Probe with Coaching Questions For each theme, generate 1-2 coaching questions to deepen the conversation. Examples: - "What would have to be true for this not to happen again?" - "Who is best positioned to address this, and what's stopping them?" - "If we did nothing about this, what would be the cost in 3 months?" ## Step 5: Drive to 2-3 Action Items From themes, propose 2-3 action items maximum. Each: - Action verb + concrete deliverable - Owner (named human, not "the team") - Due date (next sprint or specific date) - Acceptance criteria - Theme it addresses ## Step 6: Action Tracker Review prior-retro action items. For each: completed / in-progress / dropped / forgotten. Surface forgotten items explicitly — they are signal of process failure. # OUTPUT CONTRACT ## Retro Format Used + Why ## Themes Clustered (4-7) Each: name, issue, classification, returning flag ## Coaching Questions for Live Discussion ## Proposed Action Items (max 3) | Action | Owner | Due | Acceptance | Theme | ## Prior-Retro Action Tracker | Action | Status | Notes | ## Watch List (themes to monitor next sprint) ## Format Suggestion for Next Retro (rotate) # CONSTRAINTS - DO NOT propose more than 3 action items. - DO NOT accept "the team" as an action owner. - DO NOT skip the prior-retro tracker — that's where systemic failures live. - DO call out returning themes explicitly with sprint count. - DO suggest format rotation — same format every sprint dulls signal. - IF psychological safety appears low (anonymized inputs lacking dissent), recommend an offline anonymous-input pass. - KEEP the document under 1000 words.

User Message

Facilitate a sprint retrospective for the following. **Team / sprint number / dates**: {&{TEAM_AND_SPRINT}} **Format requested (or 'recommend')**: {&{FORMAT}} **Raw retro inputs from team** (Mad/Sad/Glad, Start/Stop/Continue, etc.): {&{RAW_INPUTS}} **Sprint outcomes** (committed/delivered, goal hit Y/N): {&{SPRINT_OUTCOMES}} **Action items from last 2 retros & their status**: {&{PRIOR_ACTIONS}} **Recurring themes you've noticed**: {&{RECURRING_THEMES}} **Team dynamics / sensitivities**: {&{TEAM_DYNAMICS}} Produce the full retro facilitation document per your output contract.

About this prompt

## The retro that doesn't change anything Most teams run the same retro every sprint: same complaints ("too many meetings," "unclear requirements"), same vague action items ("we should communicate better"), same outcome (the same complaints next sprint). The retro becomes a feelings-dump ritual that produces no system change. ## What this prompt does differently It enforces the **Esther Derby / Diana Larsen retrospective discipline**: cluster raw inputs into 4-7 themes, classify each as systemic / incidental / cultural / tooling, probe with coaching questions, drive to a maximum of 3 action items with named owners and due dates, and run a prior-retro action tracker that surfaces forgotten action items explicitly. The killer feature is **returning-theme detection**. When the same theme appears in two consecutive retros, the prompt flags it `RETURNING — 2nd time` and treats it as a system problem requiring process change, not another vague action item. This single discipline breaks the loop where the same complaints recur for quarters. ## Format rotation Same format every sprint dulls signal. The prompt suggests next-sprint format rotation: Mad/Sad/Glad → Start/Stop/Continue → 4Ls → Sailboat. Each surface a different layer of team experience. ## Pro tips - Always include the last 2 retros' action items; the tracker is where the truth lives - For low-trust teams, run an anonymous async input gathering before the live retro - Use the coaching questions live — they're 80% of the value - Cap action items at 3, even when 5 feel obvious; 3 with follow-through beat 5 forgotten ## Who should use this - Engineering managers running bi-weekly retrospectives - Agile coaches facilitating across multiple teams - Tech leads filling in for scrum masters - Product trios running design/eng/PM retros

When to use this prompt

check_circleBi-weekly sprint retrospectives for engineering teams stuck on returning issues
check_circleQuarterly cross-team retros where systemic themes need formal classification
check_circleFirst retros for new teams needing baseline format selection and coaching questions

Example output

smart_toySample response

A Markdown facilitation guide with chosen format, 4-7 clustered themes with classification and returning flags, coaching questions, max-3 action items table with owners, prior-retro action tracker, watch list, and next-retro format suggestion.

signal_cellular_altintermediate

Latest Insights

Stay ahead with the latest in prompt engineering.

View blogchevron_right

How to Write System Prompts That Actually Work

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

How to Write System Prompts That Actually Work

System prompts set the rules of the game for every AI interaction. This hands-on guide shows you exactly how to structure them for reliability and consistency.

Claude vs GPT-4o: Which Model Fits Your Use Case?

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

Claude vs GPT-4o: Which Model Fits Your Use Case?

Choosing between Claude and GPT-4o is less about which is "better" and more about which fits your specific task. Here is a practical breakdown.

How Our Design Team Cut Brief-Writing Time by 70% with AI

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

How Our Design Team Cut Brief-Writing Time by 70% with AI

A real-world case study on how a 12-person design team at a product agency standardised their creative brief process using prompt templates on PromptShip.

Why AI Hallucinations Happen (and How to Reduce Them)

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

Why AI Hallucinations Happen (and How to Reduce Them)

Hallucinations are not bugs — they are a fundamental property of how language models work. Understanding why they happen is the first step to minimising them.

The State of AI Coding Assistants in 2026

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

The State of AI Coding Assistants in 2026

From autocomplete to autonomous agents — AI coding tools have changed dramatically. Here is where things stand and what to expect next.

From Idea to Shipped Prompt: A Solo Founder's AI Workflow

Article

person Admin•schedule 5 min read

From Idea to Shipped Prompt: A Solo Founder's AI Workflow

One founder. No team. A dozen AI-powered tools and a tight prompt library. Here is the workflow that runs a bootstrapped SaaS doing $15k MRR.

Recommended Prompts

claudeshieldTrusted

bookmark

Engineering Sprint Retrospective

Facilitate a blameless engineering sprint retro with data, themes, and two durable action items.

Purpose-Driven Time-Boxed Meeting Agenda Builder

Builds rigorous, time-boxed meeting agendas with explicit decision/discussion/inform tags, named owners, pre-reads, and a kill-meeting test that flags when the meeting shouldn't happen at all — turning calendar bloat into focused 30-minute outcomes.

Jira Epic Breakdown Planner

Decompose a product epic into well-scoped stories with acceptance criteria, dependencies, and estimates.

RAG-Status Project Update Writer with Action Items

Writes a tight RAG (Red/Amber/Green) project status update with honest health rating, milestone progress, scope/budget/timeline tracking, blockers requiring escalation, and named action items — eliminating the chronic Watermelon Status problem (green outside, red inside).

Design an Agile Execution Framework for Consulting Delivery

Generates an agile delivery framework adapted for consulting engagements, balancing iterative delivery with the structured reporting clients expect.

Porter's Five Forces Competitive Landscape Analyzer

Performs a structured Porter's Five Forces analysis on a market or product category — quantifying buyer power, supplier power, competitive rivalry, threat of substitutes, and threat of new entrants — and outputs a defensibility score plus 5 specific moves to strengthen the company's position.

star 0fork_right 387

bolt

pin_invoke