retro

The user wants to do a retrospective.

## Determine scope

Parse $ARGUMENTS to determine what to review:

- No arguments: review only archive/raw/ (unreviewed items)
- `--full`: review EVERYTHING in archive/ (both raw/ and reviewed/)
- Any other text: treat as a focus topic or angle. Search across archive/
  and filter/analyze through that lens (e.g. "/retro authentication work" or
  "/retro patterns in how I scope tasks")

## Process

1. Read all items in scope. For each topic folder, read brainstorm.txt, plan.txt,
   and iteration files to understand the full story.
2. Present a high-level review to the user with this structure:

```
RETRO: <date or scope description>

## Items Reviewed

- <topic 1> - <one line summary>
- <topic 2> - <one line summary>
- ...

## Themes

- <theme 1>: <brief explanation of the pattern>
- <theme 2>: <brief explanation>
- ...

## Open Questions

- <questions that emerged from reviewing the material>

## Suggested Actions

- <concrete things the user could do based on what was found>
```

3. Discuss with the user. Let them react, add context, or dig into anything.
4. When the user is satisfied, write the retro output to:
   work/retro-<date>/brainstorm.txt
   (Retros are themselves topic artifacts that flow through the same lifecycle)
5. Move any raw items that were reviewed to archive/reviewed/:
   - archive/raw/<topic>/ → archive/reviewed/<topic>/

## Important

- Surface themes, don't force them. If there are no patterns, say so.
- Open questions and suggested actions should be listed, not walked through
  interactively. Same philosophy as brainstorm - capture, don't converge.
- When using --full, include previously reviewed items in the analysis.
  The point is to see the full picture, not just new stuff.
- When given a focus topic, stay on that angle. Don't try to be comprehensive
  about everything - go deep on what was asked.