analyze

name	analyze
description	Deep analysis workflow for codebases, architectures, systems, products, markets, or research topics. Use when the user asks to analyze, investigate, assess, evaluate, compare, or research something in a structured way.
context	fork
argument-hint	["topic","question","or area to analyze"]

Analyze

Perform structured analysis with explicit scope, evidence, and conclusions.

1. Classify the Request

Identify:

• Subject
• Core question
• Scope
• Desired depth
• Audience
• Decision the analysis should inform

2. Choose a Framework

Pick one to three frameworks from analytical-frameworks.md based on the question type.

Typical pairings:

• Current-state assessment -> gap analysis, architecture assessment
• Root cause -> 5 Whys, fishbone, causal analysis
• Comparison -> weighted scoring, MCDA
• Strategy -> SWOT, Porter's Five Forces, JTBD
• Technical assessment -> architecture review, technical debt assessment

3. Plan the Investigation

Break the work into MECE dimensions.

For each dimension, define:

• What evidence is needed
• Where it will come from
• What would confirm or contradict the current hypothesis

4. Collect Evidence

Use the minimum set of relevant sources:

• Repository files and docs
• Structured data or metrics
• Targeted commands
• Web research when current external information is required

Track evidence quality and note assumptions.

5. Analyze

Rules:

• Lead with evidence, not opinion
• Consider at least one alternative explanation
• State confidence explicitly
• Separate facts, inference, and recommendation

6. Present the Result

Use output-templates.md to structure the output.

All outputs should include:

• Executive summary
• Context
• Analysis
• Findings
• Recommendations
• Risks and limitations

Companion Resources

• analytical-frameworks.md
• output-templates.md