메뉴
Use when checking code quality trends, tech debt accumulation, TODO/FIXME growth, test coverage ratios, PR size distribution, or generating a code quality report. Trigger phrases: code quality, code trends, tech debt trends, quality report.
Codex 또는 Claude로 설치 이 Prompt를 복사해 Codex, Claude 또는 다른 어시스턴트에 붙여 넣으면 Skill 페이지를 검토하고 설치를 진행할 수 있습니다.
SOC 직업 분류 기준
| name | code-quality-trends |
| description | Use when checking code quality trends, tech debt accumulation, TODO/FIXME growth, test coverage ratios, PR size distribution, or generating a code quality report. Trigger phrases: code quality, code trends, tech debt trends, quality report. |
| category | qa |
| capabilities | ["trend-tracking","static-analysis"] |
| input_types | ["git-diff","code-path","repo"] |
| output_types | ["code","report"] |
| complexity | moderate |
| cost_profile | low |
| maturity | beta |
| metadata_source | inferred |
Produce a monthly trends report tracking code quality signals across repositories using Sourcegraph and GitHub CLI tools. The report measures TODO/HACK/FIXME accumulation, test file ratios, and PR merge patterns.
See _shared/report-config.md for the standard config resolution pattern.
Config schema (~/.claude/skills/code-quality-trends/config.json):
repos: list of repository name strings (Sourcegraph-compatible format)lookback_days: number (default: 30)Required scope: at least one repos entry.
Measure TODO/HACK/FIXME accumulation. For each repo:
keyword_search with query repo:^{repo}$ (TODO|HACK|FIXME) to count current occurrences.diff_search with pattern="TODO|HACK|FIXME", added=true, after="{lookback_days} days ago", useRegex=true to count newly added markers in the period.diff_search with pattern="TODO|HACK|FIXME", removed=true, after="{lookback_days} days ago", useRegex=true to count removed markers in the period.Measure test file ratio. For each repo:
keyword_search with query repo:^{repo}$ file:test type:path count:all to count test files.keyword_search with query repo:^{repo}$ file:\.(py|java|ts|js|go|kt|scala)$ type:path count:all to count source files (exclude test files).Analyze PR size distribution. For each repo, use gh CLI:
gh pr list --repo {repo} --state merged --limit 100 --json additions,deletions,number,title,mergedAt filtered to the lookback period.Measure PR merge rates and review turnaround. For each repo, use gh CLI:
gh pr list --repo {repo} --state merged --limit 100 --json createdAt,mergedAt,number filtered to lookback period.gh pr list --repo {repo} --state open --json createdAt,number,title to count stale open PRs (open > 7 days).Check for large files or binary additions. Use diff_search with pattern matching large additions (files with >500 added lines in a single commit) during the period. Flag as potential code quality concern.
Generate report. Output markdown:
## Code Quality Trends — {date}
Repos: {repo list} | Period: last {lookback_days} days
### Summary
- Total PRs merged: {N} | Median PR size: {N} lines | XL PRs (>1000 lines): {N}%
- TODO/HACK/FIXME net change: {+/-N} | Current total: {N}
- Test file ratio: {N}%
### Tech Debt Markers (TODO/HACK/FIXME)
| Repo | Current Total | Added | Removed | Net Change | Trend |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Per-repo breakdown with trend arrow)
### Test Coverage Ratio
| Repo | Test Files | Source Files | Ratio | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
(Per-repo breakdown)
### PR Size Distribution
| Repo | Small (<50) | Medium (50-250) | Large (250-1K) | XL (>1K) | Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(Per-repo breakdown)
### PR Velocity
| Repo | Merged/Week | Median Time-to-Merge | Stale Open PRs |
|---|---|---|---|
(Per-repo breakdown)
### Flags
(Any concerning signals: growing debt, shrinking test ratio, many XL PRs, stale PRs)
Post to #team-digests channel if configured, never to a primary team channel.
Terminate. Report is complete when all repos have all metrics computed.
TODO|HACK|FIXME must be searched with useRegex=true to catch all variants.| Excuse | Reality |
|---|---|
| "I estimated the TODO count from a sample of files." | Run the actual keyword_search. Sampling gives wrong numbers. |
| "PR sizes aren't available so I skipped that section." | The gh CLI returns additions and deletions for every PR. Compute the sum. |
| "Test ratio is hard to measure so I described it qualitatively." | Count test files. Count source files. Divide. It's arithmetic, not judgment. |
| "The repo has too many PRs to analyze all of them." | Use --limit 100 and note the sample size. 100 PRs is a representative sample for monthly trends. |
| "I listed the metrics but didn't flag any concerns." | The Flags section exists to surface concerning trends. If debt is growing or test ratio is shrinking, say so. |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
report_complete | All repos analyzed, all metrics computed, flags identified |
report_partial | Some repos analyzed but search or CLI errors prevented full coverage — noted which |
no_repos_configured | No repos specified — need config.json or user input |
api_error | Sourcegraph or GitHub API unreachable |
Convene the 18-member Council of High Intelligence — simulate multi-persona deliberation from Aristotle, Feynman, Torvalds, Taleb, Kahneman, and 13 others, then synthesize into ONE verdict. Use when facing hard decisions, design tradeoffs, strategy questions, or when you want diverse adversarial perspectives on a problem. Trigger on "/council", "ask the council", "what would the council say", "multi-perspective analysis". Supports --quick (fast), --duo (dialectic pair), --triad <domain>, --full (all 18), --members a,b,c.
Finds viable product, business, or project ideas in any domain by generating candidates, rigorously validating each against real competitors and market data, and killing weak ideas with documented reasons. Two modes — fast batch generate-and-kill (default), or `--deep` DFS that branches a single space into opportunity tuples with codex cross-attack, mandatory steelman, and a VC-gauntlet fundability gate. Use when the user asks to brainstorm ideas, find market gaps, identify business opportunities, figure out what to build, come up with side project ideas, find underserved niches, or (with --deep) "find the real opportunities in X", "exhaustively explore X", "keep digging until you exhaust X". Works for SaaS, open source, MCP servers, apps, tools, APIs, or any product category.
Stress-test a startup/product proposal like a top-tier VC partner meeting — reality-checked against real market data, with an independent codex devil's-advocate bear case — then iterate hardened rewrites to a GO / CONDITIONAL-GO / NO-GO verdict. Use when the user says "vc review", "is this fundable", "would a VC fund this", "tear apart my startup idea", "pitch critique", "investor lens", "gauntlet this", "red-team my startup", "poke holes in my idea". Also the fundability gate invoked by opportunity-dfs §8.
The single entry point for ALL design and specification work. Use when designing, specifying, architecting, writing a spec, RFC, design doc, or drafting a design for any system, feature, product, protocol, game, or workflow. Trigger phrases include "design this", "architect this", "design spec", "design review", "write a spec", "technical spec", "RFC", "API design", "data model", and "implementation spec". Default mode: adversarial stress-testing with parallel critics. Use `--spec` for lightweight single-session spec document generation without critics.
Use when researching, investigating, or exploring a topic systematically with orthogonal multi-dimensional coverage and source-quality tiers. Trigger phrases include "research this deeply", "deep research on", "investigate this topic thoroughly", "explore this topic", "systematic research", "multi-dimensional research", "comprehensive research", "cover all angles of", "thorough research on", "deep dive into (research)", "exhaustive research". Spawns parallel agents across WHO/WHAT/HOW/WHERE/WHEN/WHY/LIMITS with risk-stratified spot-checking. Bounded by a user-controlled round budget with honest coverage reporting on what was and wasn't covered.
Use when the user says "autopilot", "build this", "make it", "ship it", "just do it", "do it", "implement this", or gives a vague idea, spec, task list, or bug fix and expects autonomous execution. Handles decomposition, agent coordination, and verification automatically. "build me end to end", "go from idea to code", "do everything", "run this autonomously". Follows the Spec-Driven Development workflow: specify → clarify → plan → tasks → analyze → implement.