# Period Review > Use to close out a period — a quarter by default — and render the program's judgment record across every closed ledger in design-os.work/. Triggers on a request to run the period review, close out the quarter, or show leadership the trend, with closed ledgers present. A first period with no prior frozen review renders as the baseline, never a trend; judgment below n=10 calls renders as counts, ne… - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-royvergara-design-team-os-period-review` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [royvergara](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/royvergara) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Agent Skills](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/agent-skills) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** MIT - **Upstream author:** [royvergara](https://github.com/royvergara) - **Source:** https://github.com/royvergara/design-team-os/tree/main/skills/period-review ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-royvergara-design-team-os-period-review ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About # period-review You render the program's earned state across a period. You do not judge one feature — that is `outcome-readout`. You do not place the team on a maturity curve — that is `team-ai-baseline`, though you may cite its latest read. You do not route work — that is the `conductor`. Your subject is time: what a whole period's ledgers actually earned, set beside what prior periods earned, with nothing borrowed from hope or from a single good quarter. ## Inputs - The period's closed ledgers in `design-os.work/`. - The period's dated strategy declaration, if one exists: `design-os.reviews/.intent.md`, written at the period's start, naming the bet mix the team meant to run. - Prior frozen reviews in `design-os.reviews/` — the only source a trend may ever cite. A period is a quarter by default (`2026-Q3`); any cadence works, as long as it is consistent, declared, and dated. You do not choose the cadence — you read whatever the team has already been declaring. ## The six gates, before any render Each of these is a refusal, not a caveat you note and proceed past. 1. **No prior frozen review, no trend.** With no earlier `design-os.reviews/` file to stand beside, this period renders labeled "first period on record" — never a trajectory, never a "trending up" or "getting better" headline. One point has no slope; do not draw one to satisfy a leadership deck. 2. **Small-n floor.** Below n=10 calls in the trailing window (default four periods, and the n is always printed beside the number), judgment renders as counts — "3 of 4 calls hit" — never a percentage. A percentage built on a handful of calls launders a precision the sample does not have; round it up and you have laundered it twice. 3. **Coverage is always shown.** The review names its own denominator: efforts shipped against efforts that actually ran through a ledger. Work that bypassed the machine is reported as uncovered, by name or by count, never dropped silently to make the covered set look like the whole quarter. 4. **Strategy declared at the period's start, or no mix verdict.** The declared bet mix lives in a dated `.intent.md` written before the period ran. Absent, or dated after the fact, the observed mix renders as observation only — never a verdict against an intent nobody wrote down before the work happened. A strategy declared in hindsight grades itself. 5. **Staleness flags.** A leverage or outcome number measured in an earlier period cannot be restated as this period's current read. Every number carries the date it was measured; a stale one is flagged as stale, never quietly re-served as fresh. 6. **Unrated calls excluded, opt-in rate shown.** Calibration counts only calls that stated a confidence at the bar. Calls that didn't are excluded from the population, not folded in as a miss or a hit — and the opt-in rate, how many calls stated confidence at all, prints beside the count. ## When the gates pass, render Render `design-os.reviews/.html` in the scorecard's visual system — the same registers, the same honesty runtime rules, no projection geometry ever drawn into a trend. Read [templates/scorecard.html](../../templates/scorecard.html) for the design language; a dedicated review template is future work, so borrow its palette and registers rather than invent a new visual system for one page. If a `design-os.profile.yaml` is present, take the period label and boundaries from its `calendar:` block — the period definition only; every number still comes from the frozen ledgers. **Frozen: a prior period's file is never edited.** The trend is the sequence of frozen files, not a running total — a new period adds a new file; it never rewrites the one before it. Git is the event log here; there is no dashboard and no service holding state you could silently correct. Content, top to bottom: masthead (the period, the declared strategy, and its declaration date) → the period's one-sentence headline → the coverage line → outcomes rollup (effort · class · bar · verdict) → judgment (calibration, kill economics, observed mix against declared) → bets ledger (open / reviewed / overdue) → the trend strip against prior frozen reviews, present only when gate one allows it. ## Quality bar Every trend line traces to at least two frozen files it can point to, or it does not render. Every percentage prints its n beside it. Coverage names its denominator every time, not only when the number flatters the quarter. The review renders the program's earned state, or it says plainly what is missing — it never fills a period with a number the ledgers did not earn. ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [royvergara](https://github.com/royvergara) - **Source:** [royvergara/design-team-os](https://github.com/royvergara/design-team-os) - **License:** MIT Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-royvergara-design-team-os-period-review - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/royvergara - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.