Stats
Actions
Tags
From project-toolkit
Grades repo quality per product domain and architectural layer (agents, skills, scripts, tests, docs, workflows) with A-F scores, gap tracking, and trends in markdown/JSON reports. For auditing quality and tracking improvements.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/project-toolkit:quality-gradesclaude-sonnet-4-6The summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Grade each product domain and architectural layer. Track gaps over time.
Grade each product domain and architectural layer. Track gaps over time.
grade qualityaudit domain qualityshow quality gapsrun quality gradesdomain quality report# Grade all auto-detected domains
python3 .claude/skills/quality-grades/scripts/grade_domains.py
# Grade specific domains as JSON
python3 .claude/skills/quality-grades/scripts/grade_domains.py --domains security memory --format json
# Write report to file (enables trend tracking)
python3 .claude/skills/quality-grades/scripts/grade_domains.py --output quality-grades.md
# Show top 10 domains by gap count
python3 .claude/skills/quality-grades/scripts/grade_domains.py --top-n 10
| Grade | Score | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| A | 90-100 | Full coverage, no known gaps |
| B | 75-89 | Minor gaps, non-blocking |
| C | 60-74 | Gaps present, should address |
| D | 40-59 | Significant gaps, blocking quality |
| F | 0-39 | Broken or missing |
Each domain is graded across six layers:
| Layer | What it checks |
|---|---|
| agents | Agent definition file completeness |
| skills | SKILL.md presence and structure |
| scripts | Automation scripts with docstrings |
| tests | Test file coverage for the domain |
| docs | Documentation in docs/ and .agents/ |
| workflows | GitHub Actions workflow coverage |
| Severity | Meaning |
|---|---|
| critical | Missing required artifact (blocks quality) |
| significant | Important gap (should address soon) |
| minor | Nice-to-have improvement |
When --output is used, the script loads previous JSON results to compute trends:
| Trend | Meaning |
|---|---|
| improving | Score increased by 5+ points |
| stable | Score changed less than 5 points |
| degrading | Score decreased by 5+ points |
| new | No previous data |
Use this skill when:
Use code-qualities-assessment instead when:
| Avoid | Why | Instead |
|---|---|---|
| Grading without context | Scores depend on repo structure | Run from repo root |
| Ignoring trends | Single snapshots miss trajectory | Use --output for persistence |
| Treating all F grades equally | Some domains are optional | Focus on domains with critical gaps |
After execution:
| File | Content |
|---|---|
references/code-qualities.md | Five foundational qualities (cohesion, coupling, DRY, encapsulation, testability) with diagnostics |
references/solid-principles.md | SOLID overview, violation signs, mapping to code qualities, grading application |
references/kiss-principle.md | Simplicity principles, KISS vs YAGNI, complexity justification criteria |
npx claudepluginhub rjmurillo/ai-agents --plugin project-toolkitGrades repo quality per product domain and architectural layer (agents, skills, scripts, tests, docs, workflows). Tracks gaps, trends; outputs Markdown/JSON reports for audits, improvement tracking.
Generates one-time or comparative code quality scorecards with evidence-backed ratings across correctness, maintainability, and structure. Supports baseline, compare, review, and action queue modes.
Assesses code maintainability using 5 qualities (cohesion, coupling, encapsulation, testability, non-redundancy) with scoring rubrics across languages at method/class/module levels. Generates markdown reports with remediation guidance.