Assessment Skill

SkillAI & models

Lets your agent inspect a codebase, check service health, and weigh decisions without changing anything.

Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.

Add ahel to your AI once: Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude Code or Codex. Then ask it to use this.

Then ask your AI: use the Assessment Skill skill

About this skill

Assessment: read-only inspection, codebase overview, value analysis, health checks, ADR consultation, decision analysis, multi-perspective critique.

What this skill tells your AI

The instructions your AI receives, as published by notque/vexjoy-agent in skills/analysis/assessment/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.

Seven modes for read-only analysis and decision support. Match the request to a mode, then follow that mode's phases.

Mode Selection

Request patternMode
Inspect, browse, explore without changingRead-Only Inspection
Onboard, overview, summarize repo, codebase structureCodebase Overview
Repo value analysis, compare repos, what can we learnRepo Value Analysis
Service status, health check, uptime, validate endpointsService Health Check
Consult on ADR, challenge design, architecture consultationADR Consultation
Help me decide, decision matrix, pros/cons, trade-offsDecision Scoring
Critique ideas, devil's advocate, stress test, roastMulti-Persona Critique

Read-Only Inspection

Safe exploration without modifying files or system state.

Phase 1: SCOPE

Parse the request. Determine target scope (file, directory, service, system-wide). Clarify before proceeding if scope could match dozens of results.

Phase 2: GATHER

Use read-only tools only.

Allowed: ls, find, wc, du, df, file, stat, ps, top -bn1, uptime, free, pgrep, git status/log/diff/show/branch, sqlite3 "SELECT ...", curl -s (GET only), date, env.

Forbidden: mkdir, rm, mv, cp, touch, chmod, chown, git add/commit/push, file writes, INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE/DROP, npm/pip/apt install, kill, systemctl restart.

Phase 3: REPORT

Lead with the answer. Show supporting evidence. List files examined. All claims must cite evidence.


Codebase Overview

4-phase exploration producing an evidence-backed onboarding report. Read-only.

Read any .claude/CLAUDE.md or CLAUDE.md in the repo root first. Skip sensitive files (.env, *.pem, *.key, credentials) silently.

Phase 1: DETECT

Examine root directory. Identify project type from config files (package.json, go.mod, pyproject.toml, pom.xml, Cargo.toml). Document: language, framework, build system, dependencies. Load references/codebase-overview/exploration-strategies.md for language-specific discovery commands.

Gate: Project type identified. Tech stack documented.

Phase 2: EXPLORE

Discover entry points, core modules, data models, API surfaces, configuration, tests. Limit 20 files per category. Map directory structure (exclude node_modules/, venv/, vendor/, dist/, build/, __pycache__/).

Gate: Entry points, core modules, data layer, API surface, config, tests documented.

Phase 3: MAP

Identify design patterns with file evidence. Map 5-10 key abstractions. Trace a typical request through the full stack. Analyze last 10 commits. All paths absolute. All claims cite source files.

Gate: Patterns identified, abstractions mapped, data flow documented.

Phase 4: SUMMARIZE

Generate report using references/codebase-overview/report-template.md. Include "Where to Add New Code" section. Run post-exploration secret scan.

For deep-dive mode ("full picture"), launch 4 parallel domain agents via Task. See references/codebase-overview/examples-and-errors.md for dispatch template.

Scripts: scripts/cartographer.py (quick), scripts/cartographer_omni.py (100-metric), scripts/cartographer_ultimate.py (focused performance).


Repo Value Analysis

6-phase pipeline analyzing external repositories for adoptable ideas.

Phase 1: CLONE

Parse input (GitHub URL, local path, org/repo). git clone --depth 1. Categorize files into zones (skills, agents, hooks, docs, tests, config, code, other). Cap zones at ~100 files.

Phase 2: DEEP-READ (parallel)

Dispatch 1 Agent per zone (up to 8). Each reads EVERY file and produces: component inventory, key techniques, notable patterns, gaps. Output to /tmp/[REPO]-zone-[zone].md.

Gate: 75%+ agents returned.

Phase 3: INVENTORY (parallel with Phase 2)

Dispatch 1 Agent to catalog vexjoy-agent repo: agents, skills, hooks, scripts with counts. Output to /tmp/self-inventory.md.

Phase 4: SYNTHESIZE

Read all zone findings and inventory. Build comparison table. Rate gaps: HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW. Save draft to research-[REPO]-comparison.md.

Phase 5: AUDIT (parallel)

For each HIGH/MEDIUM recommendation, dispatch 1 audit Agent to verify: ALREADY EXISTS, PARTIAL, or MISSING. Skip with --quick.

Phase 6: REPORT

Adjust recommendations from audit. Write final report: executive summary, comparison table, already-covered, recommendations, verdict, next steps. Clean /tmp/ files. Load references/repo-value-analysis/phase7-implement-template.md for implementation dispatch.


Service Health Check

Deterministic service monitoring: Discover-Check-Report. Never report healthy without verifying process status independently.

Phase 1: DISCOVER

Locate service definitions: services.json, docker-compose, systemd units, or user input. Build manifest: process pattern, health file, port, stale threshold per service.

Phase 2: CHECK

Per service: (1) pgrep -f "<pattern>" for process status, (2) parse health file JSON for staleness/status/connections, (3) ss -tlnp "sport = :<port>" for port.

ConditionStatus
Process not runningDOWN
Running + health file missing/staleWARNING
Running + status=errorERROR
Running + disconnected >30minWARNING
Running + port not listeningERROR
Running + healthyHEALTHY

Gate: All services evaluated with evidence.

Phase 3: REPORT

Output summary (X/N healthy), highlight services needing action, provide copy-pasteable remediation. Never auto-restart without explicit flag.

For endpoint validation, load references/service-health-check/endpoint-validator.md. For CVE source auditing, load references/service-health-check/cve-source-check.md.


ADR Consultation

3-agent parallel architecture consultation producing PROCEED or BLOCKED.

Phase 1: DISCOVER

Locate ADR (user path, .adr-session.json, or ask). Validate via adr-query.py. Read full ADR. Create adr/{adr-name}/ directory.

Gate: ADR read, path validated, consultation directory created.

Phase 2: DISPATCH (parallel)

Launch all 3 agents in ONE message. Load references/adr-consultation/agent-prompts.md for prompt templates:

  1. Contrarian (reviewer-perspectives): challenge assumptions, simpler alternatives
  2. User advocate (reviewer-perspectives): user impact, cognitive load
  3. Meta-process (reviewer-perspectives): system health, coupling, SPOF

For complex decisions, add 2 more agents (see agent-prompts.md).

Gate: All agents returned and wrote to adr/{adr-name}/.

Phase 3: SYNTHESIZE

Read agent files from disk. Extract concerns to adr/{adr-name}/concerns.md. Determine verdict: all PROCEED = strong consensus, any BLOCK = hard block, mixed = significant concerns. Write adr/{adr-name}/synthesis.md. Issue verdict per references/adr-consultation/consultation-patterns.md.


Decision Scoring

Weighted scoring for 2-4 options. Runs inline (no fork).

Step 1: Frame

State decision in one sentence. List 2-4 options. Eliminate non-starters first.

Step 2: Criteria

Default weights (adjust per domain -- load references/decision-helper/decision-archetypes.md for build-vs-buy, database, cloud, framework, API, or operational tooling):

CriterionWeightMeasures
Correctness5Solves the actual problem
Complexity3Added complexity (lower = better)
Maintainability3Ease of change/debug
Risk3Failure mode severity
Effort2Implementation time
Familiarity2Team comfort
Ecosystem1Library/community support

Lock weights before scoring. Do not adjust after seeing results.

Step 3: Score

Rate each option 1-10 per criterion with one-sentence justification. Calculate sum(score * weight) / sum(weights).

Step 4: Analyze

All scores <6.0: no good option -- explore alternatives. Top two within 0.5: close call -- identify deciding criteria. Top leads by >0.5: recommend winner. If matrix contradicts intuition, ask which criterion is missing.

Step 5: Persist

Append to active ADR session (.adr-session.json) or task plan.


Multi-Persona Critique

5-persona parallel critique with consensus synthesis.

Phase 1: UNDERSTAND

Extract or generate numbered proposals. Each: what it does, why it matters, how it differs from status quo (2-4 sentences). Research domain first if generating.

Phase 2: BRIEF

Load references/multi-persona-critique/personas.md. Build prompts for 5 personas, each receiving ALL proposals:

  1. The Logician: coherence, assumptions, falsifiability
  2. The Pragmatic Builder: build cost, maintenance, simpler alternatives
  3. The Systems Purist: accidental complexity, separation of concerns
  4. The End User Advocate: friction, delight, solved-problem test
  5. The Skeptical Philosopher: human agency, dependency risk

Each produces: STRONG/PROMISING/WEAK/REJECT per proposal, ranked list, cross-cutting observations.

Phase 3: DISPATCH (parallel)

Launch all 5 via Agent. Wait for ALL to complete.

Phase 4: SYNTHESIZE

Build consensus matrix (proposals x personas x ratings). Classify: CONSENSUS (4+ agree), CONTESTED (2-3 split), OUTLIER (1 vs 4). Score: STRONG=3, PROMISING=2, WEAK=1, REJECT=0. Sum per proposal (0-15).

Phase 5: PRESENT

Generate report using references/multi-persona-critique/synthesis-template.md: consensus matrix, features to build, worth investigating, disagreements, shelve, cross-cutting insights.

For roast-style code critique with HN personas and file:line validation, load references/multi-persona-critique/roast.md.


Deep References

Load on demand when the corresponding phase needs detailed lookup data.

ContextReferenceContent
Codebase overview: language commandsreferences/codebase-overview/exploration-strategies.mdPer-language discovery commands
Codebase overview: report formatreferences/codebase-overview/report-template.md12-section report template
Codebase overview: deep-dive dispatchreferences/codebase-overview/examples-and-errors.mdParallel agent template, worked examples
Codebase overview: statistical lensesreferences/codebase-overview/statistical-three-lenses.mdThree-lens statistical analysis
Codebase overview: metrics catalogreferences/codebase-overview/statistical-metrics-catalog.md100-metric catalog
Codebase overview: statistical phasesreferences/codebase-overview/statistical-phase-details.mdPhase banners and workflows
Codebase overview: statistical examplesreferences/codebase-overview/statistical-analysis-examples.mdReal-world statistical workflows
Value analysis: implementationreferences/repo-value-analysis/phase7-implement-template.mdAgent dispatch template
Health check: endpoint validationreferences/service-health-check/endpoint-validator.mdFull endpoint validation methodology
Health check: security headersreferences/service-health-check/security-headers.mdHSTS, CSP reference
Health check: endpoint configreferences/service-health-check/endpoint-config-preferred-patterns.mdConfig patterns
Health check: auth endpointsreferences/service-health-check/auth-endpoint-patterns.mdAuth endpoint patterns
Health check: CVE sourcesreferences/service-health-check/cve-source-check.mdCVE source check methodology
ADR: agent promptsreferences/adr-consultation/agent-prompts.md3-agent prompt templates
ADR: artifact patternsreferences/adr-consultation/consultation-patterns.mdVerdict display, artifact templates
ADR: failure modesreferences/adr-consultation/consultation-preferred-patterns.mdDispatch and verdict fixes
ADR: error recoveryreferences/adr-consultation/error-handling.mdError recovery by phase
Decision: archetypesreferences/decision-helper/decision-archetypes.mdArchetype-specific criteria weights
Decision: failure modesreferences/decision-helper/decision-preferred-patterns.mdScoring discipline patterns
Critique: personasreferences/multi-persona-critique/personas.md5 persona specifications
Critique: synthesisreferences/multi-persona-critique/synthesis-template.mdConsensus matrix and report
Critique: examplesreferences/multi-persona-critique/examples-and-errors.mdWorked examples, failure modes
Critique: roast modereferences/multi-persona-critique/roast.mdHN persona evidence-based critique

Signals

GitHub stars
425
Forks
46
Last commit
Sep 2026
Advanced
Catalog kind
skill
Key
assessment
Source
github.com/notque/vexjoy-agent