Skip to main content

methodology-advisor

Analyzes your codebase and asks 3 targeted questions to recommend the right AI-assisted development methodology stack

Informations de source

Dépôt
FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide
Dernière activité de la source
30 septembre 2026 à 13:41
Langue détectée de SKILL.md
anglais
Étoiles
6 173
Forks
809

Options d'installation

Le prompt qui vérifie d'abord la source est sélectionné par défaut. Vous pouvez passer à une commande directe ou télécharger une copie locale.

Vérifiez les fichiers source

Lisez SKILL.md et les fichiers associés affichés par SkillsMP avant de décider de l'installer.

Affichage de SKILL.md

SKILL.md
Instructions source · Aperçu en lecture seule
name
methodology-advisor
description
Analyzes your codebase and asks 3 targeted questions to recommend the right AI-assisted development methodology stack
effort
medium
allowed-tools
Read Grep Glob
# Methodology advisor Analyze this project and recommend the best AI-assisted development methodology stack. Read what you can from the codebase first, then ask only what you cannot infer. **Time**: 2-4 minutes | **Output**: One recommended stack + contextual quick start --- ## Phase 1: Silent codebase analysis Run these reads silently. Do not output results yet, build an internal picture only. ### 1.1 Project identity ```bash # Config files cat CLAUDE.md 2>/dev/null || cat claude.md 2>/dev/null cat package.json 2>/dev/null | grep -E '"name"|"description"|"scripts"' | head -10 cat Cargo.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -E '^name|^description' | head -5 cat pyproject.toml 2>/dev/null | grep -E '^name|^description' | head -5 cat go.mod 2>/dev/null | head -3 ``` ### 1.2 Team size ```bash # Unique contributors in last 90 days git log --since="90 days ago" --format="%ae" 2>/dev/null | sort -u | wc -l # Total commits git log --oneline 2>/dev/null | wc -l ``` ### 1.3 Test maturity ```bash # Test files exist? find . -name "*.test.*" -o -name "*.spec.*" -o -name "*_test.*" -o -name "test_*.py" \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | grep -v ".git" | wc -l # Test framework hints grep -rn --include="*.json" --include="*.toml" --include="*.yaml" \ -l "jest\|vitest\|pytest\|rspec\|mocha\|cypress\|playwright" \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | head -5 # CI config ls .github/workflows/*.yml 2>/dev/null | wc -l ls .gitlab-ci.yml .circleci/config.yml 2>/dev/null | wc -l ``` ### 1.4 Spec and documentation signals ```bash # Spec files find . -name "*.spec.md" -o -name "SPEC*.md" -o -name "spec.md" -o -name "DESIGN*.md" \ -o -name "ADR*.md" -o -name "RFC*.md" \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | grep -v ".git" | head -10 # OpenAPI / contract files find . -name "openapi*.yaml" -o -name "openapi*.json" -o -name "swagger*.yaml" \ -o -name "*.proto" \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | head -5 # BDD feature files find . -name "*.feature" 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | wc -l ``` ### 1.5 Codebase size and structure ```bash # File count (rough) find . -type f \( -name "*.ts" -o -name "*.tsx" -o -name "*.js" -o -name "*.py" \ -o -name "*.rs" -o -name "*.go" -o -name "*.java" -o -name "*.rb" \) \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | grep -v ".git" | wc -l # Services / packages (monorepo signal) ls packages/ apps/ services/ 2>/dev/null | head -10 ``` ### 1.6 AI and LLM signals ```bash # LLM API usage in code grep -rn --include="*.ts" --include="*.py" --include="*.js" \ -l "anthropic\|openai\|groq\|mistral\|langchain\|llm\|ChatCompletion\|claude" \ 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | grep -v ".git" | head -5 # Eval framework hints find . -name "evals*" -o -name "*eval*" -type d 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | head -5 ``` --- ## Phase 2: Score the 8 stacks Using what you found, score each stack 0-10 based on fit signals: | Stack | Key signals that boost the score | |-------|----------------------------------| | **solo-mvp** | 1 contributor, few files, no CI yet, greenfield | | **team-greenfield** | 2-10 contributors, new project, no legacy files | | **microservices** | `packages/`, `services/`, OpenAPI files, `.proto` | | **brownfield-saas** | High commit count, large file count, few test files | | **enterprise-gov** | 10+ contributors, CI, ADR files, `AGENTS.md` | | **llm-native** | LLM imports, eval dirs, AI product signals | | **power-solo** | 1 contributor, high commit rate, iterative commits | | **plan-moderate** | Mixed signals, CLAUDE.md present, moderate size | --- ## Phase 3: Ask only what you cannot infer After the silent analysis, present your preliminary picture to the user in 2-3 lines, then ask exactly 3 questions. No more. Format: ``` From your codebase I can see: [2-3 concrete observations]. Before recommending, 3 quick questions: 1. [Pain point question, pick the most relevant from below] 2. [Deploy frequency, if not inferable from CI/CD signals] 3. [Setup appetite: how much ceremony are you willing to invest?] ``` **Question bank: pick the 3 most relevant given what you found:** - Pain: "What slows you down most right now: regressions, unclear requirements, context rot between sessions, or no traceability?" - Pain: "When Claude generates a large chunk of code, what is your biggest worry: quality, drift from spec, or losing track of what was built?" - Deploy: "How often do you ship to production: multiple times a day, weekly, or on longer release cycles?" - Deploy: "Is this a product with real users today, a prototype, or an internal tool?" - Governance: "How much initial setup are you willing to invest: none (just start), 30 minutes, or half a day?" - Governance: "Does anyone outside your dev team (PM, QA, compliance) need to validate what gets built?" - AI product: "Does your product expose AI-generated outputs directly to end users?" - Scale: "Do multiple services or teams need to agree on API contracts before implementing?" --- ## Phase 4: Recommendation Output the recommendation in this structure: --- ### Your stack: [Stack name] [icon] **Why this fits your project:** - [Finding from Phase 1] -> [explains this stack choice] - [Finding from Phase 1] -> [explains this stack choice] - [Answer to question N] -> [explains this stack choice] **Methodologies included:** `[Method A]` + `[Method B]` (+ `[Method C]` if applicable) **What this looks like in practice:** [2-3 sentences describing the concrete workflow for THIS project, using actual file names or paths found.] **Quick start for your project:** 1. [Concrete first step using actual project context] 2. [Second step] 3. [Third step] **Before you start, note:** - [One honest trade-off or limitation of this stack] - [One thing to watch out for given what you found] **Go deeper:** https://cc.bruniaux.com/methodologies/ (interactive quiz and full stack comparison) **Full methodology guide:** https://cc.bruniaux.com/guide/methodologies/ --- ## Stack reference (internal) Use this to map your scoring to quick-start language: **solo-mvp** (SDD + TDD): Write feature spec in CLAUDE.md -> `"Write failing tests for this spec, then implement until green."` **team-greenfield** (Spec Kit + TDD + BDD): `/speckit.constitution` -> Given/When/Then scenarios with PM -> TDD each scenario. **microservices** (CDD + Specmatic + TDD): Write OpenAPI spec first -> Specmatic for contract tests -> TDD implementation. **brownfield-saas** (OpenSpec + BDD + JiTTesting): OpenSpec captures current state -> BDD for changed behavior -> pre-merge: `"Generate tests that catch regressions in this diff."` **enterprise-gov** (BMAD + Spec Kit + Specmatic): `constitution.md` -> agent role definitions -> Spec Kit requirements -> Specmatic contract enforcement. **llm-native** (Eval-Driven + Multi-Agent): Define eval criteria (accuracy, safety, format) -> build eval harness -> iterate until evals pass. **power-solo** (TDD + Ralph Loop + Iterative): Tight test loop -> fresh context per task via git stash + progress files -> `"Keep iterating until all tests pass and lint is clean."` **plan-moderate** (Plan-First + SDD + Context Engineering): Every complex task starts in Plan Mode (Shift+Tab) -> validate -> write spec in CLAUDE.md -> execute with progressive context loading.
Voir sur GitHub