L

lesson-learned

by @softaworksv
4.4(96)

Git履歴から最近のコード変更を分析し、ソフトウェア工学の教訓を抽出し、ユーザーの学習と成長を支援します。

post-mortem-analysisknowledge-sharingprocess-improvementrisk-managementcontinuous-learningGitHub
インストール方法
npx skills add softaworks/agent-toolkit --skill lesson-learned
compare_arrows

Before / After 効果比較

1
使用前

`lesson-learned`ツールがない場合、コード変更から教訓をまとめるには通常、手作業が必要でした。これには、Git履歴のレビュー、コードの読み込み、コンテキストの理解、議論への参加、そして手動での要約作成が含まれます。このプロセスは時間がかかり、主観性が高く、重要なエンジニアリング原則やパターンを見落としがちでした。

使用後

`lesson-learned`ツールを使用すると、AIがGit履歴とコード変更を自動的に分析し、具体的なソフトウェアエンジニアリングの教訓を抽出できます。これにより、教訓の要約効率と客観性が大幅に向上し、チームが過去のプラクティスからより迅速に学び、将来の開発作業を改善するのに役立ちます。

SKILL.md

Lesson Learned

Extract specific, grounded software engineering lessons from actual code changes. Not a lecture -- a mirror. Show the user what their code already demonstrates.

Before You Begin

Load the principles reference first.

  1. Read references/se-principles.md to have the principle catalog available
  2. Optionally read references/anti-patterns.md if you suspect the changes include areas for improvement
  3. Determine the scope of analysis (see Phase 1)

Do not proceed until you've loaded at least se-principles.md.

Phase 1: Determine Scope

Ask the user or infer from context what to analyze.

ScopeGit CommandsWhen to Use
Feature branchgit log main..HEAD --oneline + git diff main...HEADUser is on a non-main branch (default)
Last N commitsgit log --oneline -N + git diff HEAD~N..HEADUser specifies a range, or on main (default N=5)
Specific commitgit show <sha>User references a specific commit
Working changesgit diff + git diff --cachedUser says "what about these changes?" before committing

Default behavior:

  • If on a feature branch: analyze branch commits vs main
  • If on main: analyze the last 5 commits
  • If the user provides a different scope, use that

Phase 2: Gather Changes

  1. Run git log with the determined scope to get the commit list and messages
  2. Run git diff for the full diff of the scope
  3. If the diff is large (>500 lines), use git diff --stat first, then selectively read the top 3-5 most-changed files
  4. Read commit messages carefully -- they contain intent that raw diffs miss
  5. Only read changed files. Do not read the entire repo.

Phase 3: Analyze

Identify the dominant pattern -- the single most instructive thing about these changes.

Look for:

  • Structural decisions -- How was the code organized? Why those boundaries?
  • Trade-offs made -- What was gained vs. sacrificed? (readability vs. performance, DRY vs. clarity, speed vs. correctness)
  • Problems solved -- What was the before/after? What made the "after" better?
  • Missed opportunities -- Where could the code improve? (present gently as "next time, consider...")

Map findings to specific principles from references/se-principles.md. Be specific -- quote actual code, reference actual file names and line changes.

Phase 4: Present the Lesson

Use this template:

## Lesson: [Principle Name]

**What happened in the code:**
[2-3 sentences describing the specific change, referencing files and commits]

**The principle at work:**
[1-2 sentences explaining the SE principle]

**Why it matters:**
[1-2 sentences on the practical consequence -- what would go wrong without this, or what goes right because of it]

**Takeaway for next time:**
[One concrete, actionable sentence the user can apply to future work]

If there is a second lesson worth noting (maximum 2 additional):

---

### Also worth noting: [Principle Name]

**In the code:** [1 sentence]
**The principle:** [1 sentence]
**Takeaway:** [1 sentence]

What NOT to Do

AvoidWhyInstead
Listing every principle that vaguely appliesOverwhelming and genericPick the 1-2 most relevant
Analyzing files that were not changedScope creepStick to the diff
Ignoring commit messagesThey contain intent that diffs missRead them as primary context
Abstract advice disconnected from the codeNot actionableAlways reference specific files/lines
Negative-only feedbackDemoralizingLead with what works, then suggest improvements
More than 3 lessonsDilutes the insightOne well-grounded lesson beats seven vague ones

Conversation Style

  • Reflective, not prescriptive. Use the user's own code as primary evidence.
  • Never say "you should have..." -- instead use "the approach here shows..." or "next time you face this, consider..."
  • If the code is good, say so. Not every lesson is about what went wrong. Recognizing good patterns reinforces them.
  • If the changes are trivial (a single config tweak, a typo fix), say so honestly rather than forcing a lesson. "These changes are straightforward -- no deep lesson here, just good housekeeping."
  • Be specific. Generic advice is worthless. Every claim must point to a concrete code change.

ユーザーレビュー (0)

レビューを書く

効果
使いやすさ
ドキュメント
互換性

レビューなし

統計データ

インストール数2.7K
評価4.4 / 5.0
バージョン
更新日2026年5月21日
比較事例1 件

ユーザー評価

4.4(96)
5
23%
4
52%
3
23%
2
2%
1
0%

この Skill を評価

0.0

対応プラットフォーム

🔧Claude Code
🔧OpenClaw
🔧OpenCode
🔧Codex
🔧Gemini CLI
🔧GitHub Copilot
🔧Amp
🔧Kimi CLI

タイムライン

作成2026年3月16日
最終更新2026年5月21日