| name | assess-team-code-quality |
| description | assess code quality contributions by developer |
Soul
Analyze code quality patterns by developer — who writes maintainable code vs technical debt.
Analysis Protocol
Phase 1: Code Quality Indicators
Look for indicators in git history:
- PR/merge sizes (small focused vs large batch)
- Refactoring commits (cleanups, improvements)
- Bug fix patterns (quick fixes vs proper solutions)
- Code review participation
Phase 2: Author Attribution
Where possible, attribute code patterns:
- Who introduced large files?
- Who creates technical debt (TODO, FIXME comments)?
- Who does cleanup work?
- Who struggles with test coverage?
Phase 3: Quality Distribution
Assess:
- Consistency of code quality across authors
- Patterns of improvement vs degradation
- Ownership of critical components
Output Format
Save to: docs/assessment/team-<YYYY-MM-DD>-code-quality.md
# Team Assessment: Code Quality
## Author Code Quality Profiles
| Author | Avg PR Size | Refactor % | Technical Debt | Quality Score |
|--------|-------------|------------|----------------|---------------|
| ... | N | X% | Low/Med/High | A-F |
## Quality Distribution
[Analysis of how quality is distributed across team]
## Key Findings
1. [Finding with evidence]
2. [Finding with evidence]
## Score: A-F (one line rationale)
## Recommendations
1. [Priority]
2. [Secondary]
Return Summary
Return max 10 lines:
- Top quality contributors
- Quality distribution insight
- Score: A-F with one-line rationale