# Insight Assess

> >

- **Type:** Skill
- **Install:** `agentstack add skill-allemaar-open-skills-insight-assess`
- **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior
- **Seller:** [allemaar](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/allemaar)
- **Installs:** 0
- **Category:** [AI & ML](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/ai-and-ml)
- **Latest version:** 0.1.0
- **License:** Apache-2.0
- **Upstream author:** [allemaar](https://github.com/allemaar)
- **Source:** https://github.com/allemaar/open-skills/tree/main/skills/insight-assess
- **Website:** https://allemaar.com

## Install

```sh
agentstack add skill-allemaar-open-skills-insight-assess
```

Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent.

## About

# /assess

Structured evaluation of an approach, decision, or implementation — assess viability across multiple dimensions and deliver a clear recommendation.

> **Structured execution spec:** [`protocol.yon`](protocol.yon). Read it for the canonical rules and step sequence; this file is explanation. The two must stay in sync — if you edit one, update the other and refresh the `@STAMP` date.

> **Decision Support Protocol — convergent evaluation.** `/insight-explore` generates alternatives (divergent). `/insight-assess` evaluates them (convergent). `/insight-critique` reviews outputs (reactive). Three complementary tools.

## Phase 1 — Frame the Decision

Identify what is being assessed: a specific approach, a decision between options, an implementation pattern, or an architectural direction.

Load relevant context — files, docs, KIs, skills. Define what we are optimizing for and the constraints.

**Gate:** cannot assess without a clear subject. If the decision cannot be framed, ask for clarification before proceeding.

## Phase 2 — Dimensional Analysis

Evaluate across all relevant dimensions. Skip dimensions that don't apply.

**Pros & cons** — concrete advantages and disadvantages. Cite actual code, dependencies, or patterns. No vague generalizations. If comparing multiple options, do side-by-side.

**Quality assessment** — score `STRONG` / `ADEQUATE` / `WEAK` with justification on:

- **Performance** — bundle size, runtime overhead, N+1 queries, render cycles
- **Code quality** — DRY violations, coupling, testability, readability
- **Developer experience** — API ergonomics, debugging ease, onboarding friction
- **Maintainability** — upgrade path, community support, lock-in risk

**Impact assessment** — map and classify overall impact `LOW` / `MEDIUM` / `HIGH`:

- **Blast radius** — packages/apps/files
- **Migration effort** — if replacing something
- **Breaking changes** — if any
- **Learning curve** — for the team
- **Future flexibility** — does this open or close doors?

## Phase 3 — Alignment Check

- Does this align with repo coding standards?
- Does it follow existing patterns, or introduce a new one?
- If new, is it justified?
- Check relevant skills and KIs for prior art.

## Phase 4 — Recommendation

Structure:

- **VERDICT** — one of: `PROCEED` / `PROCEED WITH CAVEATS` / `RECONSIDER` / `REJECT`
- **RATIONALE** — 1–2 sentences
- **CONDITIONS** — if `PROCEED WITH CAVEATS`: what must be addressed
- **ALTERNATIVES** — if `RECONSIDER` / `REJECT`: what to do instead

**Gate:** assessment is incomplete without a recommendation delivered to the user.

## Rules

- MUST be concrete and specific when listing pros/cons — cite actual code, libraries, or patterns.
- MUST check performance, DX, and maintainability — not just correctness.
- MUST use consistent dimensions across all options when comparing.
- MUST NOT make changes, write code, or execute — evaluation only.
- MUST NOT hedge without a clear verdict — always commit to a recommendation.
- SHOULD note caveats or conditions even if minor when recommending PROCEED.
- SHOULD suggest concrete alternatives when recommending RECONSIDER.

## Next Steps

- `/plan-create` — if verdict is PROCEED
- `/insight-explore` — if more options are needed before deciding
- `/insight-critique` — if a deeper review of specific output is needed

> **Human output.** This skill's handler-facing output obeys the human-output
> contract (`human-output/SKILL.md`).

> **Next skills.** On completion, run the Next Skills protocol (`next-skills/SKILL.md`): surface the `next-skills` recommendations from front-matter for the caller to pick. Offer only — never auto-invoke.

> **Self-improvement.** On completion, run the Self-Improvement Protocol (`self-improve/SKILL.md`): if this run surfaced a concrete, blocking-or-recurring weakness in this skill, propose a specific fix for the handler to approve. Conservative — silent otherwise. Never auto-apply.

## Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

- **Author:** [allemaar](https://github.com/allemaar)
- **Source:** [allemaar/open-skills](https://github.com/allemaar/open-skills)
- **License:** Apache-2.0
- **Homepage:** https://allemaar.com

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

## Pricing

- **Free** — Free

## Security capabilities

Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access:

- **Network access:** no
- **Filesystem access:** no
- **Shell / process execution:** no
- **Environment & secrets:** no
- **Dynamic code execution:** no

*"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.*


## Versions

- **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source.

## Links

- Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-allemaar-open-skills-insight-assess
- Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/allemaar
- Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse

---
Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.