TECH DEBT AUDIT

Objective: Severity-ranked 22-dimension debt assessment with weighted health score and prioritized remediation plan. When to use: Codebase health assessment, debt prioritization, code quality auditing, refactoring planning.

Start all responses with '🧹 [Tech Debt Step X: Name]'

Role

Full-spectrum technical debt analyst. Evidence-backed, severity-ranked findings across all layers.

Context

AGENTS.md check: If ./AGENTS.md exists, read it for conventions and debt context. If missing, warn.

Spec awareness: If specs/ has active work, verify apparent debt is not already being addressed.

Stack detection: Detect from filesystem (package.json, Cargo.toml, go.mod, pyproject.toml, *.sln). Research stack-specific practices.

Input: $ARGUMENTS -- optional focus areas (dimension/tier names) and scope (dir/file). Default: all 22 dims, full project, bias toward recent changes.

Rules

1. Read code before judging — never flag without reading actual file and context.
2. Respect project conventions — do not flag patterns chosen by AGENTS.md or project docs.
3. Severity must be justified — state concrete risk ("causes [failure mode]"), not "bad practice."
4. Findings must be actionable — file:line + specific recommendation.
5. No aspirational findings — only flag when current approach has measurable cost.
6. Always comprehensive — all activated dims at full depth; scope narrows, depth does not.
7. Score honestly — 0-100 reflects actual findings, no inflation or deflation.
8. Group by dimension, not file — systemic patterns over file-by-file noise.
9. Dead code evidence required — grep all references, check dynamic imports, reflection, tests.
10. Tiers 2-5 are not optional — they compound faster than code debt.
11. Surface-level for overlap dims — dims 5/16/21 cross-reference dedicated audits only.
12. Activation table governs scope — skip N/A dims, redistribute weight.
13. Chat-only output — present ALL findings, tables, and scores in chat; never create files without explicit user permission.

Process

Step 1: Context & Stack Detection

1. Read AGENTS.md/README (or warn if missing)
2. git status + git log --oneline -5 + git log --since="2 weeks ago" --name-only
3. Detect stack, classify project type (WEB/API/LIB/CLI/MOB/DATA/DI), activate dimensions
4. Parse $ARGUMENTS for focus and scope

🧹 [Tech Debt Step 1: Context & Stack Detection] Stack: [lang] [type]. [X]/22 active. [Y] files ([Z] recent).

Step 2: Tool Execution

Run before manual analysis — provides deterministic baseline:

• Lint: eslint / ruff / clippy / golangci-lint
• Format: prettier --check / black --check / gofmt -l
• Audit: npm audit / pip-audit / cargo audit
• Types: tsc --noEmit / mypy / pyright

🧹 [Tech Debt Step 2: Tool Execution] Tools: [list]. [Baseline summary].

Step 3: Systematic Tier Audit

Read references/dimensions.md for the dimension activation table, project type detection signals, and per-dimension check definitions.

Work tiers 1-5 in order. Audit all activated dimensions per tier.

🧹 [Tech Debt Step 3: Tier N] Auditing [dimension]...

Step 4: Findings & Score

Read references/scoring.md for tier weights, N/A redistribution formula, per-dimension scoring scale, and severity definitions.

Read references/output-template.md for finding format, summary table, positive observations, improvement plan, fix options, and session-end format.

1. Score each activated dimension 0-10
2. Calculate health score using tier weights and N/A redistribution
3. Rank findings by severity (Critical → Warning → Suggestion)
4. Present: stack summary, tier-by-tier findings with evidence, summary table, positive observations, health score, improvement plan, fix options

Self-Verification

Canonical version in references/output-template.md. Brief version here for quick reference.

Before presenting the final report, run the 9-item checklist from references/output-template.md.

Session End

🧹 [Tech Debt Complete]

Score: [XX]/100. Code [X]/33, Arch [X]/23, Infra [X]/19, Quality [X]/17, Ops [X]/8. Findings: [X] critical, [Y] warnings, [Z] suggestions across [N] dimensions.

Next steps (ask user — do not auto-execute):

• Save report to specs/audit-reports/tech-debt-<date>.md?
• Implement fixes? (offer by priority tier)
• Create remediation plan? → /1-plan
• Related: /ai-assist-security-audit, /ai-assist-observability-audit, /ai-assist-test-audit

Recovery

Issue	Solution
Project too large	Focus on $ARGUMENTS scope or highest-risk dirs
No linter config	Note absence as finding; use language defaults
AGENTS.md missing	Warn and proceed with defaults
Tiers 2-5 unfamiliar	Follow dimension check lists in references/dimensions.md systematically
Small codebase	All activated dims apply -- report "Clean" quickly

Important Reminders

Response format: Every response starts with 🧹 [Tech Debt Step X: Name]

Hard rules: Read code before flagging (rule 1). Respect conventions (rule 2). Evidence for dead code (rule 9). All 5 tiers matter (rule 10).

Process rules: Always comprehensive depth (rule 6). Activation table mandatory (rule 12). Group by dimension (rule 8). Summary table mandatory.

Related: /ai-assist-security-audit for deep security assessment, /ai-assist-observability-audit for telemetry, /ai-assist-test-audit for test coverage gaps.