Install
$ agentstack add skill-dtsong-my-claude-setup-pattern-analysis ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Pattern Analysis
Purpose
Audit the codebase for existing patterns and conventions, then evaluate proposed changes for consistency.
Scope Constraints
- Covers file naming, directory structure, component patterns, data fetching, state management, error handling, and type conventions.
- Does not cover test strategy design or coverage targets — hand off to testing-strategy.
- Does not cover high-level architectural decisions or system decomposition — hand off to architect department.
Inputs
- Codebase or directory to audit
- Proposed changes or new code to evaluate (if applicable)
- Specific concerns or areas of focus (if any)
- Known tech stack and framework conventions
Input Sanitization
No user-provided values are used in commands or file paths. All inputs are treated as read-only analysis targets.
Procedure
Step 1: Scan Structural Patterns
- File naming conventions:
- kebab-case, PascalCase, camelCase, snake_case
- Suffix conventions (.utils.ts, .types.ts, .test.ts, .stories.tsx)
- Directory organization:
- Feature-based (feature/components, feature/hooks, feature/utils)
- Layer-based (components/, hooks/, utils/, types/)
- Hybrid approaches
- Module export patterns:
- Barrel files (index.ts re-exports)
- Direct imports
- Default vs named exports
Step 2: Identify Code Patterns
- Component patterns:
- Server vs client components (React Server Components)
- Composition patterns (render props, compound components, HOCs)
- Prop drilling vs context vs stores
- Data fetching patterns:
- Custom hooks (useQuery, useSWR, custom fetch hooks)
- Server actions
- API routes
- Direct fetch in server components
- State management patterns:
- Local state (useState, useReducer)
- Context (React Context, providers)
- External stores (Zustand, Jotai, Redux)
- URL state (search params, pathname)
- Error handling patterns:
- try/catch blocks
- Result/Either types
- Error boundaries
- Toast notifications
- Type patterns:
- interfaces vs type aliases
- Generic patterns and utility types
- Zod schemas vs manual types
- Shared type files vs co-located types
Step 3: Catalog Existing Conventions
Document discovered conventions:
| Category | Convention | Example File | Frequency | |----------|-----------|--------------|-----------| | File naming | ... | ... | ... | | Component style | ... | ... | ... | | Data fetching | ... | ... | ... | | State management | ... | ... | ... | | Error handling | ... | ... | ... | | Type definitions | ... | ... | ... | | Import ordering | ... | ... | ... | | Comment style | ... | ... | ... | | Testing patterns | ... | ... | ... |
Step 4: Evaluate Proposed Changes
For each proposed change, check:
- Does it follow existing naming conventions? (files, variables, functions, components)
- Does it follow existing structural patterns? (directory placement, export style)
- Does it reuse existing utilities/helpers? (don't reinvent what exists)
- Does it introduce a new pattern? If so:
- Is the new pattern justified? (existing pattern inadequate, new requirement)
- Is it better enough to warrant migration? Or just different?
- Will it cause confusion having two patterns for the same thing?
- Does it create inconsistency with similar existing code? (same feature, neighboring files)
Step 5: Produce Recommendations
- Follow these patterns (with file references as examples):
- Pattern A: See
src/components/ExampleComponent.tsx - Pattern B: See
src/hooks/useExampleHook.ts - Avoid these patterns (with rationale):
- Anti-pattern X: Because [reason]
- Deprecated pattern Y: Replaced by [alternative]
- Consider refactoring (if new patterns are genuinely better):
- Migrate pattern A to pattern B across [scope]
- Estimated scope: [number of files affected]
> Compaction resilience: If context is compacted mid-task, re-read this Procedure section and continue from the next incomplete step.
Handoff
- If the pattern audit reveals test convention inconsistencies or missing test coverage, hand off to testing-strategy for a comprehensive test plan.
- If patterns suggest deeper architectural issues such as unclear module boundaries or circular dependencies, hand off to architect department for structural analysis.
Output Format
Pattern Inventory
| Category | Pattern | Example File | Frequency | Status | |----------|---------|--------------|-----------|--------| | File naming | kebab-case components | src/components/team-card.tsx | High | Standard | | Data fetching | useQuery hooks | src/hooks/use-teams.ts | High | Standard | | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
Consistency Report
| Proposed Change | Existing Pattern | Match? | Recommendation | |----------------|-----------------|--------|----------------| | ... | ... | Yes/No | ... |
Recommendations
- Follow: [pattern] — see [file reference]
- Avoid: [anti-pattern] — because [rationale]
- Refactor: [migration suggestion] — [scope and effort]
Quality Checks
- [ ] At least 3 file/code categories audited (naming, structure, data fetching, state, errors)
- [ ] Naming conventions documented with examples
- [ ] Data fetching pattern identified and documented
- [ ] State management pattern identified and documented
- [ ] New code evaluated against each discovered pattern
- [ ] Example files referenced for each pattern
- [ ] Anti-patterns identified with rationale
- [ ] Recommendations are actionable (not vague)
Evolution Notes
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: dtsong
- Source: dtsong/my-claude-setup
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.