Assesses and rates quality 0-10 with pros/cons analysis. Use when evaluating code, designs, or approaches.
Comprehensive assessment skill for answering "is this good?" with structured evaluation, scoring, and actionable recommendations.
/ork:assess backend/app/services/auth.py
/ork:assess our caching strategy
/ork:assess --model=opus the current database schema
/ork:assess frontend/src/components/Dashboard
TARGET = "$ARGUMENTS" # Full argument string, e.g., "backend/app/services/auth.py"
# $ARGUMENTS[0] is the first token (CC 2.1.59 indexed access)
# Model override detection (CC 2.1.72)
MODEL_OVERRIDE = None
for token in "$ARGUMENTS".split():
if token.startswith("--model="):
MODEL_OVERRIDE = token.split("=", 1)[1] # "opus", "sonnet", "haiku"
TARGET = TARGET.replace(token, "").strip()
Pass MODEL_OVERRIDE to all Agent() calls via when set. Accepts symbolic names (, , ) or full IDs () per CC 2.1.74.
model=MODEL_OVERRIDEopussonnethaikuclaude-opus-4-6Load:
Read("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/chain-patterns/references/mcp-detection.md")
# 1. Probe MCP servers (once at skill start)
ToolSearch(query="select:mcp__memory__search_nodes")
# 2. Store capabilities
Write(".claude/chain/capabilities.json", {
"memory": probe_memory.found,
"skill": "assess",
"timestamp": now()
})
# 3. Check for resume
state = Read(".claude/chain/state.json") # may not exist
if state.skill == "assess" and state.status == "in_progress":
last_handoff = Read(f".claude/chain/{state.last_handoff}")
| Phase | Handoff File | Contents |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | 00-intent.json | Dimensions, target, mode |
| 1 | 01-baseline.json | Initial codebase scan results |
| 2 | 02-evaluation.json | Per-dimension scores + evidence |
| 3 | 03-report.json | Final report, grade, recommendations |
BEFORE creating tasks, clarify assessment dimensions:
AskUserQuestion(
questions=[{
"question": "What dimensions to assess?",
"header": "Dimensions",
"options": [
{"label": "Full assessment (Recommended)", "description": "All dimensions: quality, maintainability, security, performance", "markdown": "```\nFull Assessment (7 phases)\n──────────────────────────\n Dimensions scored 0-10:\n ┌─────────────────────────────┐\n │ Correctness ████████░░ │\n │ Maintainability ██████░░░░ │\n │ Security █████████░ │\n │ Performance ███████░░░ │\n │ Testability ██████░░░░ │\n │ Architecture ████████░░ │\n │ Documentation █████░░░░░ │\n └─────────────────────────────┘\n + Pros/cons + alternatives\n + Effort estimates + report\n Agents: 4 parallel evaluators\n```"},
{"label": "Code quality only", "description": "Readability, complexity, best practices", "markdown": "```\nCode Quality Focus\n──────────────────\n Dimensions scored 0-10:\n ┌─────────────────────────────┐\n │ Correctness ████████░░ │\n │ Maintainability ██████░░░░ │\n │ Testability ██████░░░░ │\n └─────────────────────────────┘\n Skip: security, performance\n Agents: 1 code-quality-reviewer\n Output: Score + best practice gaps\n```"},
{"label": "Security focus", "description": "Vulnerabilities, attack surface, compliance", "markdown": "```\nSecurity Focus\n──────────────\n ┌──────────────────────────┐\n │ OWASP Top 10 check │\n │ Dependency CVE scan │\n │ Auth/AuthZ flow review │\n │ Data flow tracing │\n │ Secrets detection │\n └──────────────────────────┘\n Agent: security-auditor\n Output: Vuln list + severity\n + remediation steps\n```"},
{"label": "Quick score", "description": "Just give me a 0-10 score with brief notes", "markdown": "```\nQuick Score\n───────────\n Single pass, ~2 min:\n\n Read target ──▶ Score ──▶ Done\n 7.2/10\n\n Output:\n ├── Composite score (0-10)\n ├── Grade (A-F)\n ├── 3 strengths\n └── 3 improvements\n No agents, no deep analysis\n```"}
],
"multiSelect": false
}]
)
Based on answer, adjust workflow:
Load details: Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/orchestration-mode.md") for env var check logic, Agent Teams vs Task Tool comparison, and mode selection rules.
# 1. Create main task IMMEDIATELY
TaskCreate(
subject="Assess: {target}",
description="Comprehensive evaluation with quality scores and recommendations",
activeForm="Assessing {target}"
)
# 2. Create subtasks for each assessment phase
TaskCreate(subject="Understand target and gather context", activeForm="Understanding target") # id=2
TaskCreate(subject="Discover scope and build file list", activeForm="Discovering scope") # id=3
TaskCreate(subject="Rate quality across 7 dimensions", activeForm="Rating quality") # id=4
TaskCreate(subject="Analyze pros and cons", activeForm="Analyzing pros/cons") # id=5
TaskCreate(subject="Compare alternatives", activeForm="Comparing alternatives") # id=6
TaskCreate(subject="Generate improvement suggestions", activeForm="Generating suggestions") # id=7
TaskCreate(subject="Compile assessment report", activeForm="Compiling report") # id=8
# 3. Set dependencies for sequential phases
TaskUpdate(taskId="3", addBlockedBy=["2"]) # Scope needs target understanding
TaskUpdate(taskId="4", addBlockedBy=["3"]) # Rating needs scoped file list
TaskUpdate(taskId="5", addBlockedBy=["4"]) # Pros/cons needs quality scores
TaskUpdate(taskId="6", addBlockedBy=["4"]) # Alternatives need quality scores
TaskUpdate(taskId="7", addBlockedBy=["5", "6"]) # Suggestions need analysis
TaskUpdate(taskId="8", addBlockedBy=["7"]) # Report needs suggestions
# 4. Before starting each task, verify it's unblocked
task = TaskGet(taskId="2") # Verify blockedBy is empty
# 5. Update status as you progress
TaskUpdate(taskId="2", status="in_progress") # When starting
TaskUpdate(taskId="2", status="completed") # When done — repeat for each subtask
| Question | How It's Answered |
|---|---|
| "Is this good?" | Quality score 0-10 with reasoning |
| "What are the trade-offs?" | Structured pros/cons list |
| "Should we change this?" | Improvement suggestions with effort |
| "What are the alternatives?" | Comparison with scores |
| "Where should we focus?" | Prioritized recommendations |
| Phase | Activities | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Target Understanding | Read code/design, identify scope | Context summary |
| 1.5. Scope Discovery | Build bounded file list | Scoped file list |
| 2. Quality Rating | 7-dimension scoring (0-10) | Scores with reasoning |
| 3. Pros/Cons Analysis | Strengths and weaknesses | Balanced evaluation |
| 4. Alternative Comparison | Score alternatives | Comparison matrix |
| 5. Improvement Suggestions | Actionable recommendations | Prioritized list |
| 6. Effort Estimation | Time and complexity estimates | Effort breakdown |
| 7. Assessment Report | Compile findings | Final report |
Identify what's being assessed and gather context:
# PARALLEL - Gather context
Read(file_path="$ARGUMENTS[0]") # If file path
Grep(pattern="$ARGUMENTS[0]", output_mode="files_with_matches")
mcp__memory__search_nodes(query="$ARGUMENTS[0]") # Past decisions
Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/scope-discovery.md") for the full file discovery, limit application (MAX 30 files), and sampling priority logic. Always include the scoped file list in every agent prompt.
Output results incrementally as each evaluation phase completes:
| After Phase | Show User |
|---|---|
| 1. Target Understanding | Scope summary, file list, context |
| 1.5. Scope Discovery | Bounded file list (max 30 files) |
| 2. Quality Rating | Each dimension's score as the evaluating agent returns |
| 3. Pros/Cons | Balanced evaluation summary |
For Phase 2 parallel agents, show each dimension's score as soon as the evaluating agent returns — don't wait for all 4 agents. If any dimension scores below 4/10, flag it immediately as a priority concern requiring user attention.
Rate each dimension 0-10 with weighted composite score. Load Read("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/quality-gates/references/unified-scoring-framework.md") for dimensions, weights, grade interpretation, and per-dimension criteria. Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/quality-model.md") for assess-specific overrides.
Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/agent-spawn-definitions.md") for Task Tool mode spawn patterns and Agent Teams alternative.
Composite Score: Weighted average of all 7 dimensions (see quality-model.md).
Load Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/phase-templates.md") for output templates for pros/cons, alternatives, improvements, effort, and the final report.
See also: Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/alternative-analysis.md") | Read("${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/improvement-prioritization.md")
Load Read("${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/quality-gates/references/unified-scoring-framework.md") for grade thresholds and scoring criteria.
| Decision | Choice | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| 7 dimensions | Comprehensive coverage | All quality aspects without overwhelming |
| 0-10 scale | Industry standard | Easy to understand and compare |
| Parallel assessment | 4 agents (7 dimensions) | Fast, thorough evaluation |
| Effort/Impact scoring | 1-5 scale | Simple prioritization math |
| Rule | Impact | What It Covers |
|---|---|---|
complexity-metrics (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/complexity-metrics.md) | HIGH | 7-criterion scoring (1-5), complexity levels, thresholds |
complexity-breakdown (load ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/rules/complexity-breakdown.md) | HIGH | Task decomposition strategies, risk assessment |
ork:verify - Post-implementation verificationork:code-review-playbook - Code review patternsork:quality-gates - Task complexity assessment, gate patternsVersion: 1.4.0 (March 2026) — Added progressive output for incremental evaluation results