analysis-retro

analysis-retro is a command for Claude Code from with-geun/alive-analysis. It costs 0 tokens per session (1,443 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command that creates a retrospective report from archived analyses, meaning a review of completed work over a selected period. It summarizes findings, confidence levels, recommendations, decisions, and outcomes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Reviewing the previous month, quarter, a custom date range, or all archived analyses to identify insights and follow-up work.
Why use it?
It brings lessons from many past analyses into one review instead of requiring the user to inspect each archive separately.

Command for Claude Code

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/with-geun/alive-analysis/analysis-retro
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/with-geun/alive-analysis

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for analysis-retro

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/with-geun/alive-analysis/analysis-retro.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/with-geun/alive-analysis/analysis-retro)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/with-geun/alive-analysis/analysis-retro"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/with-geun/alive-analysis/analysis-retro.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 0 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,443 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00000 $0.01443
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00722
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00289
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00144

Measured 5d ago against content hash f47be439eb80, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

analysis-retro scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 5d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

.claude/commands/analysis-retro.md · 176 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

/analysis retro

Generate an automatic retrospective report from archived analyses.

Instructions

Step 1: Parse period parameters

Check the user's arguments:

  • --last-month (default) — previous calendar month
  • --last-quarter — previous 3 calendar months
  • --range {from} {to} — custom range (e.g., --range 2026-01 2026-03)
  • --all — all archived analyses

If no arguments provided, default to --last-month.

Tell the user: "Generating retrospective for {period}. Scanning archives..."

Step 2: Scan archived analyses

Read all analyses in analyses/archive/{YYYY-MM}/ folders within the specified period.

For each analysis, extract:

  • ID and title (from folder/file name)
  • Type: Investigation / Modeling / Simulation (from file header or ASK stage)
  • Mode: Full / Quick
  • Tags (from file header or status.md)
  • Key Insight (from summary.md or EVOLVE one-sentence insight)
  • Confidence levels (from VOICE: count of 🟢/🟡/🔴)
  • Impact Tracking table (from EVOLVE):
    • Each recommendation's Decision (Accepted/Rejected/Modified/Pending)
    • Each recommendation's Status (Not started/In progress/Done)
    • Outcome notes
  • Follow-up proposals (from EVOLVE "Follow-up Analyses" section)
  • Duration (from ID date to archive date)

Also scan analyses/active/ for any follow-up analyses that reference archived ones.

Step 3: Generate retro report

Create the file at analyses/.retro/retro_{period}.md (e.g., retro_2026-02.md or retro_2026-Q1.md).

Create the .retro/ directory inside analyses/ if it doesn't exist.

Use this template:

# Analysis Retrospective — {Period}
> Generated: {today}
> Scope: {N} analyses from {period}

---

## Summary

{2-3 sentence overview of the period's analysis activity, major themes, and key outcomes.}

---

## Analysis Activity

| Metric | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Total analyses | {N} |
| Full | {n} |
| Quick | {n} |
| Investigation 🔍 | {n} |
| Modeling 📈 | {n} |
| Simulation 🔮 | {n} |

Average duration: {X} days (Full), {X} days (Quick)

---

## Impact Tracking

### Decision Outcomes
| Status | Count | % |
|--------|-------|---|
| ✅ Accepted | {n} | {%} |
| ❌ Rejected | {n} | {%} |
| 🔄 Modified | {n} | {%} |
| ⏳ Pending | {n} | {%} |

### Top Wins
{List the recommendations that were Accepted + Done with positive outcomes. Max 5.}

1. **{ID}** — {Recommendation} → {Outcome}
2. ...

### Unresolved Items
{List recommendations still Pending or Not Started.}

- {ID} Rec #{n}: "{recommendation}" — {status}
- ...

---

## Patterns

### Recurring Topics
{Topics/tags that appeared in 3+ analyses.}

| Topic | Analyses | Key Trend |
|-------|----------|-----------|
| {tag} | {count} | {one-line summary of how findings evolved} |

### Common Findings
{Findings that appear across multiple analyses — convergent evidence.}

- {Finding shared by IDs}

### Confidence Distribution
| Level | Count | % |
|-------|-------|---|
| 🟢 High | {n} | {%} |
| 🟡 Medium | {n} | {%} |
| 🔴 Low | {n} | {%} |

{If 🔴 Low > 30%: "High proportion of low-confidence findings. Consider investing in better data infrastructure or longer analysis timelines."}

---

## Unresolved Follow-ups

{EVOLVE sections propose follow-up analyses. List those that haven't been started yet.}

| Source | Proposed Follow-up | Status |
|--------|--------------------|--------|
| {ID} | {follow-up question} | 🟡 Not started / ✅ Started as {new-ID} |

{If >50% unstarted: "Most follow-up proposals haven't been acted on. Consider prioritizing the top 2-3 as next analyses."}

---

## Recommendations

Based on this retrospective:

1. **{Recommendation}**: {Explanation with supporting data}
2. **{Recommendation}**: {Explanation}
3. **{Recommendation}**: {Explanation}

{Generate 2-4 recommendations based on the patterns above. Examples:}
{- If a topic recurs: "Consolidate retention insights into a meta-analysis"}
{- If follow-ups are neglected: "Schedule dedicated follow-up time each sprint"}
{- If impact tracking is sparse: "Improve impact tracking discipline — only 30% of recommendations have outcomes recorded"}
{- If confidence is mostly 🔴: "Invest in data quality or longer timelines for higher-confidence analysis"}

---

## Appendix — Full Analysis List

| # | ID | Title | Type | Mode | Tags | Key Insight | Impact |
|---|-----|-------|------|------|------|-------------|--------|
| 1 | {ID} | {title} | {type} | {mode} | {tags} | {insight} | {Accepted/Rejected/Pending} |
| 2 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

Read the full file on GitHub · 176 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 5d ago First seen · 176 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f47be439eb80

Subscribe to this mod's changes

analysis-retro is a command published in the GitHub repository with-geun/alive-analysis (41 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,443 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.