AgentStack
SKILL unreviewed MIT Self-run

Code Health Check

skill-myclaude-sh-myclaude-creator-engine-code-health-check · by myclaude-sh

>-

No reviews yet
0 installs
17 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-myclaude-sh-myclaude-creator-engine-code-health-check

Open-source listing — not yet scanned by AgentStack. Follow the source repository for install instructions.

Security review

⚠ Flagged

1 finding(s); flagged for manual review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures
  • high Dangerous shell/eval execution.

What it can access

  • Network access No
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets Used
  • Dynamic code execution Used

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.

Are you the author of Code Health Check? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

Code Health Check

> Automated codebase health analysis with scored report and prioritized fixes.

When to use: Before a release, during sprint planning, onboarding to a new codebase, or anytime you need a structured quality snapshot.

When NOT to use: For runtime debugging (use a debugger). For security-specific audits (use a dedicated security tool). This is a structural health check, not a pentest.


Activation Protocol

Before running any checks:

  1. Load check definitions: Read references/health-checks.md
  2. Load scoring: Read references/scoring-methodology.md
  3. Detect project type: Glob for package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod
  4. Scope the check:
  • If $ARGUMENTS provided, use as path scope
  • If not, use current working directory
  1. Verify it's a code repo: Check for .git/ or source files
  • If no code found: "This doesn't appear to be a codebase. Point me to a project directory."

Question System

| Input | Required | If Missing | |-------|----------|-----------| | Target path | Yes | Ask: "Which directory should I analyze?" | | Depth | No | Default: full (all 5 dimensions) | | Exclusions | No | Default: node_modules, .git, dist, build, vendor |


Core Instructions

Run 5 health dimensions in sequence. Each produces a 0-100 score.

Dimension 1: Dead Code (weight: 15%)

# Find unused exports
grep -r "export " --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" | # extract export names
# Cross-reference with imports across codebase
# Unused export = dead code candidate
  • Glob all source files
  • Extract exported symbols (functions, classes, constants)
  • Grep for imports/usage of each symbol
  • Score: 100 - (deadexports / totalexports × 100)

Dimension 2: Dependency Health (weight: 20%)

  • Read package.json / requirements.txt / Cargo.toml
  • Check last publish date of each dependency (if available via Bash)
  • Flag: dependencies > 1 year old, deprecated packages, known CVEs
  • Score: 100 - (staledeps / totaldeps × 100)

Dimension 3: Test Coverage (weight: 25%)

  • Glob test files (.test., .spec., test, test.*)
  • Glob source files
  • Calculate ratio: testfiles / sourcefiles
  • Check for test configuration (jest.config, pytest.ini, etc.)
  • Score: (testratio × 50) + (hasconfig × 25) + (has_ci × 25)

Dimension 4: Security Surface (weight: 20%)

  • Grep for hardcoded secrets (API keys, tokens, passwords)
  • Check for eval(), exec(), dangerouslySetInnerHTML
  • Check .env.example exists (if .env is gitignored)
  • Check dependency audit (npm audit / pip-audit)
  • Score: 100 - (findings × 10), min 0

Dimension 5: Complexity Hotspots (weight: 20%)

  • Find files > 500 lines (candidates for splitting)
  • Find functions > 50 lines (candidates for extraction)
  • Find deeply nested code (> 4 levels of indentation)
  • Score: 100 - (hotspots / total_files × 100)

Quality Gate

Before presenting the report, verify:

  • [ ] All 5 dimensions produced a numeric score (0-100)
  • [ ] At least 10 files were analyzed (otherwise scope is too narrow)
  • [ ] Each finding has a specific file path (not generic advice)
  • [ ] Remediation priorities are ordered by impact (not alphabetically)

Pre-Execution Gate

Before running checks:

  • [ ] Target directory exists and contains source files
  • [ ] At least one recognized language detected
  • [ ] Not running inside node_modules or .git
  • [ ] Sufficient context to complete analysis

Degradation Handling

| Missing Element | Behavior | |----------------|----------| | No tests at all | Score dimension 3 at 0, note "No test infrastructure detected" | | No package manager | Skip dimension 2, note "No dependency manifest found" | | Binary/generated files | Exclude from analysis, note count | | Monorepo | Ask which package to analyze, or run on root | | Empty directories | Skip, don't count as dead code |


Anti-Patterns

  1. Counting lines as quality — More lines ≠ worse. Measure complexity, not volume.
  2. Flagging all old dependencies — Stable deps (lodash, express) being "old" is fine.
  3. Test file ratio as coverage — File existence ≠ meaningful test coverage.
  4. Generic advice — "You should write more tests" is useless. Specify WHICH files need tests.
  5. Ignoring context — A prototype has different health standards than production code.
  6. Running on vendor code — Always exclude node_modules, vendor, generated code.
  7. One-time snapshot thinking — Health checks should be re-run periodically, not once.

Output Format

CODE HEALTH REPORT — {project_name}
Generated: {date} | Scope: {path} | Files: {N}

OVERALL HEALTH: {score}/100 {grade}

  Dead Code        {score}/100  ████████░░  {dead_count} unused exports
  Dependencies     {score}/100  ██████████  {stale_count} stale, {vuln_count} vulnerable
  Test Coverage    {score}/100  ██████░░░░  {test_ratio}% file coverage
  Security Surface {score}/100  █████████░  {finding_count} findings
  Complexity       {score}/100  ████████░░  {hotspot_count} hotspots

TOP PRIORITIES (fix these first):
  1. {file:line} — {issue} — {impact}
  2. {file:line} — {issue} — {impact}
  3. {file:line} — {issue} — {impact}

DETAILED FINDINGS: {N} total across 5 dimensions
  [See below for per-dimension breakdown]

Grade scale: A (90+), B (75-89), C (60-74), D (40-59), F (<40)

Source & license

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

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

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.