--- name: assess description: Rate quality 0-10 with dimension breakdown, list pros/cons, compare alternatives with scores, suggest improvements with effort estimates. Use when evaluating code, designs, approaches, or asking "is this good?" context: fork version: 1.0.0 author: OrchestKit tags: [assessment, evaluation, quality, comparison, pros-cons, rating] user-invocable: true allowedTools: [Read, Grep, Glob, Task, TaskCreate, TaskUpdate, TaskList, mcp__memory__search_nodes, Bash] skills: [code-review-playbook, assess-complexity, quality-gates, architecture-decision-record, recall] argument-hint: [code-path-or-topic] --- # Assess Comprehensive assessment skill for answering "is this good?" with structured evaluation, scoring, and actionable recommendations. ## Quick Start ```bash /assess backend/app/services/auth.py /assess our caching strategy /assess the current database schema /assess frontend/src/components/Dashboard ``` --- ## Task Management (CC 2.1.16) ```python # Create main assessment task TaskCreate( subject="Assess: {target}", description="Comprehensive evaluation with quality scores and recommendations", activeForm="Assessing {target}" ) # Create subtasks for 7-phase process for phase in ["Understand target", "Rate quality", "List pros/cons", "Compare alternatives", "Generate suggestions", "Estimate effort", "Compile report"]: TaskCreate(subject=phase, activeForm=f"{phase}ing") ``` --- ## What This Skill Answers | Question | How It's Answered | |----------|-------------------| | "Is this good?" | Quality score 0-10 with reasoning | | "What are the trade-offs?" | Structured pros/cons list | | "Should we change this?" | Improvement suggestions with effort | | "What are the alternatives?" | Comparison with scores | | "Where should we focus?" | Prioritized recommendations | --- ## Workflow Overview | Phase | Activities | Output | |-------|------------|--------| | **1. Target Understanding** | Read code/design, identify scope | Context summary | | **2. Quality Rating** | 6-dimension scoring (0-10) | Scores with reasoning | | **3. Pros/Cons Analysis** | Strengths and weaknesses | Balanced evaluation | | **4. Alternative Comparison** | Score alternatives | Comparison matrix | | **5. Improvement Suggestions** | Actionable recommendations | Prioritized list | | **6. Effort Estimation** | Time and complexity estimates | Effort breakdown | | **7. Assessment Report** | Compile findings | Final report | --- ## Phase 1: Target Understanding Identify what's being assessed (code, design, approach, decision, pattern) and gather context: ```python # PARALLEL - Gather context Read(file_path="$ARGUMENTS") # If file path Grep(pattern="$ARGUMENTS", output_mode="files_with_matches") mcp__memory__search_nodes(query="$ARGUMENTS") # Past decisions ``` --- ## Phase 2: Quality Rating (6 Dimensions) Rate each dimension 0-10 with weighted composite score. See [Scoring Rubric](references/scoring-rubric.md) for details. | Dimension | Weight | What It Measures | |-----------|--------|------------------| | Correctness | 0.20 | Does it work correctly? | | Maintainability | 0.20 | Easy to understand/modify? | | Performance | 0.15 | Efficient, no bottlenecks? | | Security | 0.15 | Follows best practices? | | Scalability | 0.15 | Handles growth? | | Testability | 0.15 | Easy to test? | **Composite Score:** Weighted average of all dimensions. Launch 6 parallel agents (one per dimension) with `run_in_background=True`. --- ## Phase 3: Pros/Cons Analysis ```markdown ## Pros (Strengths) | # | Strength | Impact | Evidence | |---|----------|--------|----------| | 1 | [strength] | High/Med/Low | [example] | ## Cons (Weaknesses) | # | Weakness | Severity | Evidence | |---|----------|----------|----------| | 1 | [weakness] | High/Med/Low | [example] | **Net Assessment:** [Strengths outweigh / Balanced / Weaknesses dominate] **Recommended action:** [Keep as-is / Improve / Reconsider / Rewrite] ``` --- ## Phase 4: Alternative Comparison See [Alternative Analysis](references/alternative-analysis.md) for full comparison template. | Criteria | Current | Alternative A | Alternative B | |----------|---------|---------------|---------------| | Composite | [N.N] | [N.N] | [N.N] | | Migration Effort | N/A | [1-5] | [1-5] | --- ## Phase 5: Improvement Suggestions See [Improvement Prioritization](references/improvement-prioritization.md) for effort/impact guidelines. | Suggestion | Effort (1-5) | Impact (1-5) | Priority (I/E) | |------------|--------------|--------------|----------------| | [action] | [N] | [N] | [ratio] | **Quick Wins** = Effort <= 2 AND Impact >= 4. Always highlight these first. --- ## Phase 6: Effort Estimation | Timeframe | Tasks | Total | |-----------|-------|-------| | Quick wins (< 1hr) | [list] | X min | | Short-term (< 1 day) | [list] | X hrs | | Medium-term (1-3 days) | [list] | X days | --- ## Phase 7: Assessment Report See [Scoring Rubric](references/scoring-rubric.md) for full report template. ```markdown # Assessment Report: $ARGUMENTS **Overall Score: [N.N]/10** (Grade: [A+/A/B/C/D/F]) **Verdict:** [EXCELLENT | GOOD | ADEQUATE | NEEDS WORK | CRITICAL] ## Answer: Is This Good? **[YES / MOSTLY / SOMEWHAT / NO]** [Reasoning] ``` --- ## Grade Interpretation | Score | Grade | Verdict | |-------|-------|---------| | 9.0-10.0 | A+ | EXCELLENT | | 8.0-8.9 | A | GOOD | | 7.0-7.9 | B | GOOD | | 6.0-6.9 | C | ADEQUATE | | 5.0-5.9 | D | NEEDS WORK | | 0.0-4.9 | F | CRITICAL | --- ## Key Decisions | Decision | Choice | Rationale | |----------|--------|-----------| | 6 dimensions | Comprehensive coverage | All quality aspects without overwhelming | | 0-10 scale | Industry standard | Easy to understand and compare | | Parallel assessment | 6 agents | Fast, thorough evaluation | | Effort/Impact scoring | 1-5 scale | Simple prioritization math | --- ## Related Skills - `assess-complexity` - Task complexity assessment - `verify` - Post-implementation verification - `code-review-playbook` - Code review patterns - `quality-gates` - Quality gate patterns --- **Version:** 1.0.0 (January 2026)