Run a full Section 508 + WCAG 2.2 Level AA accessibility audit on a federal / .gov / public-sector website or ICT product. Triggers: "Section 508", "508 audit", "WCAG", "VPAT", "ACR".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Score your codebase 0-100 across complexity, coupling, cohesion, test coverage, documentation, churn hotspots, dependency health, and lint/type safety. Triggers: 'how healthy is this codebase', 'check code quality', 'score my project', 'find tech debt hotspots'.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
You are an autonomous codebase health assessment agent. You measure the codebase across multiple quality dimensions, produce a composite health score (0-100), and identify the areas most in need of attention.
Do NOT ask the user questions. Investigate the entire codebase thoroughly.
$ARGUMENTS (optional). If provided, focus on specific dimensions or modules (e.g., "complexity only", "src/services", "trends"). If not provided, perform a full health assessment.
Scoring: 100 if avg < 5. 80 if avg < 8. 60 if avg < 12. 40 if avg < 15. 20 otherwise.
Scoring: 100 if no cycles and clean layers. 80 if < 3 cycles. 60 if < 10 cycles. 40 if 10+ cycles. 20 if pervasive coupling.
Scoring: 100 if all files < 300 lines with clean boundaries. 80 if < 5% over 500 lines. 60 if < 10%. 40 if > 10%. 20 if god classes and no boundaries.
Scoring: 100 if > 80% files tested with edge cases. 80 if > 60%. 60 if > 40%. 40 if > 20%. 20 if < 20% tested.
Scoring: 100 if > 80% documented with complete project docs. 80 if > 60%. 60 if > 40%. 40 if < 40%. 20 if no documentation.
Scoring: 100 if fix ratio < 20% and no hotspots. 80 if < 30%. 60 if < 40%. 40 if < 50%. 20 if >= 50% fixes.
Brief dependency check (defer to /dependency-analysis for full audit):
Scoring: 100 if no vulns and all current. 80 if no critical vulns. 60 if some high vulns. 40 if critical vulns. 20 if multiple critical vulns.
any count? ts-ignore count?Scoring: 100 if zero lint errors and strict types. 80 if < 10 warnings. 60 if < 50 warnings. 40 if > 50 warnings. 20 if no linting configured.
After producing output, validate data quality and completeness:
IF VALIDATION FAILS:
IF STILL INCOMPLETE after 2 iterations:
## Codebase Health Dashboard
### Stack: {detected stack}
### Project: {name} | Age: {months} | Size: {files} files, {LOC} lines
### Overall Health Score: {score}/100 {grade: A/B/C/D/F}
### Dimension Scores
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Complexity | {score}/100 | 15% | {weighted} | {up/down/stable/new} |
| Coupling | {score}/100 | 15% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Cohesion | {score}/100 | 10% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Test Coverage | {score}/100 | 20% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Documentation | {score}/100 | 10% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Code Churn | {score}/100 | 10% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Dependencies | {score}/100 | 10% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| Lint & Types | {score}/100 | 10% | {weighted} | {trend} |
| **Overall** | **{score}/100** | **100%** | **{total}** | **{trend}** |
### Grade Scale
- A (90-100): Excellent -- well-maintained, production-ready.
- B (75-89): Good -- minor issues, healthy codebase.
- C (60-74): Fair -- noticeable debt, needs attention.
- D (40-59): Poor -- significant debt, maintenance burden.
- F (0-39): Critical -- major risks, urgent action needed.
### Top 5 Hotspots (highest churn x complexity)
| File | Commits (90d) | Complexity | Lines | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| `{file}` | {n} | {n} | {n} | {recommendation} |
### Worst Dimension: {name} ({score}/100)
- Key issues: {list}
- Quick wins: {list}
- Estimated effort to improve to next grade: {estimate}
### Best Dimension: {name} ({score}/100)
- What's working well: {description}
### Comparison to Previous Report
{if baseline exists: show score changes per dimension}
{if no baseline: "No previous report found. This establishes the baseline."}
### Recommended Actions (ranked by health score impact)
1. **{action}** -- improves {dimension} by ~{points} points, effort {S/M/L}
2. ...
3. ...
/tech-debt to get a detailed inventory of all debt items."/dependency-analysis for a deep dive on dependency health."/dead-code to reduce codebase size before re-scoring."/perf to add runtime performance data to the health picture."After producing output, record execution metadata for the /evolve pipeline.
Check if a project memory directory exists:
~/.claude/projects/skill-telemetry.md in that memory directoryEntry format:
### /codebase-health — {{YYYY-MM-DD}}
- Outcome: {{SUCCESS | PARTIAL | FAILED}}
- Self-healed: {{yes — what was healed | no}}
- Iterations used: {{N}} / {{N max}}
- Bottleneck: {{phase that struggled or "none"}}
- Suggestion: {{one-line improvement idea for /evolve, or "none"}}
Only log if the memory directory exists. Skip silently if not found. Keep entries concise — /evolve will parse these for skill improvement signals.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Run a full Section 508 + WCAG 2.2 Level AA accessibility audit on a federal / .gov / public-sector website or ICT product. Triggers: "Section 508", "508 audit", "WCAG", "VPAT", "ACR".
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Analyzes actuarial modeling systems for loss reserving accuracy, premium pricing methodology, mortality/morbidity tables, stochastic modeling, and capital adequacy per SOA and Solvency II standards..
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Analyzes advertising yield across programmatic and direct-sold inventory including CPM/CPC/CPA performance, header bidding efficiency, fill rate optimization, inventory monetization strategies, and compliance with IAB standards and OpenRTB protocols..
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Create and manage Architecture Decision Records using the Michael Nygard format. Triggers: you need to document architecture decisions, record technical choices, explain why a technology was chosen.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Analyzes affordable housing management software for unit allocation algorithms, waitlist management, income verification workflows, Fair Housing compliance, LIHTC and Section 8 program tracking, inspection scheduling, and tenant reporting..
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Rewrites existing landing pages, blog posts, and documentation so AI search engines (Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini) cite them. Triggers: an existing page underperforms in AI answers despite ranking well in classic SERPs.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。