| name | xray |
| description | X-ray a codebase before reading it. Runs 5 git diagnostics — churn hotspots, bus factor, bug clusters, commit velocity, and revert frequency — then delivers a brief risk report. Use when the user says "xray", "scan this repo", or invokes /xray. |
xray
Run all 5 diagnostics, then deliver a single concise report. No preamble, no explaining what you're about to do — just run the commands and present findings.
Commands
Run all 5 in parallel:
1. Churn hotspots — most-changed files in the last year
git log --format=format: --name-only --since="1 year ago" | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head -20
2. Bus factor — who built this
git shortlog -sn --no-merges
3. Bug clusters — files that keep breaking
git log -i -E --grep="fix|bug|broken" --name-only --format='' | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head -20
4. Commit velocity — momentum by month
git log --format='%ad' --date=format:'%Y-%m' | sort | uniq -c
5. Revert/hotfix frequency — firefighting signals
git log --oneline --since="1 year ago" | grep -iE 'revert|hotfix|emergency|rollback'
Report format
After running the commands, deliver a short report with these sections:
Hottest files — top 5 highest-churn files. Flag any that also appear in the bug cluster list (these are the highest-risk files).
Bus factor — how concentrated is ownership? Call out if one person is 60%+ of commits. Note if top contributors appear inactive.
Bug magnets — files that keep breaking. Cross-reference with churn — files on both lists are the biggest risk.
Velocity — is the project accelerating, decelerating, or steady? Any gaps that suggest people leaving or momentum dying?
Stability — how many reverts/hotfixes in the last year? A few is normal. Every couple weeks means deploy trust is low.
End with a one-line verdict: is this codebase healthy, manageable, or on fire?
