After Action Review

Post-generation debrief: intended vs actual vs gap vs prescription. Log for recurring pattern fixes. Use after agent tasks complete. Scope boundary: five whys on hard failures → `five-whys-failure-recovery`.

CatCorner22 Updated

File contents

After-action review (AAR)

#18 · Domain: Military · Category: adaptive · Difficulty: 🟡 Medium

Core principle

What was supposed to happen? What did? Why the gap? Sustain or improve?

AI problem addressed

Generate, deliver, move on — no systematic debrief.

Implementation

  1. Original intent (parsed from prompt)
  2. Actual output
  3. Delta (gap)
  4. Prescription for next time Aggregate logs → recurring failure patterns.

Boundaries

  • Prototype as prompt scaffold (🟢) before full pipeline middleware (🟡/🔴)
  • Category router: ai-transfer-adaptive
  • Catalog: ai-transfer-ecosystem-primer
  • Runtime plugin id: aar_debrief
  • Also implements: self_evaluation, metacognitive_monitor
  • Merge notes: Post-delivery debrief owns the same loop the meta-cognition plugins sketched.

CatCorner22/Cursor_Skills/tree/main/skills/ai-transfer/after-action-review commit f7ecbc03f8

Frequently asked questions

npx skillmds@latest add catcorner22/after-action-review