Use when performing technical debt assessment — template for systematically identifying, categorizing, and prioritizing technical debt across a codebase or system. Covers code quality metrics, architecture smells, dependency risks, test coverage gaps, and creates a prioritized remediation backlog with business impact analysis.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add cloudthinker-ai/CloudSkills --skill technical-debt-assessment --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Technical Debt Assessment?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/cloudthinker-ai-technical-debt-assessment)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: technical-debt-assessment
enabled: true
description: |
Use when performing technical debt assessment — template for systematically
identifying, categorizing, and prioritizing technical debt across a codebase
or system. Covers code quality metrics, architecture smells, dependency risks,
test coverage gaps, and creates a prioritized remediation backlog with
business impact analysis.
required_connections:
- prefix: github
label: "GitHub"
config_fields:
- key: repository
label: "Repository"
required: true
placeholder: "e.g., org/payment-service"
- key: assessment_scope
label: "Assessment Scope"
required: true
placeholder: "e.g., full codebase, backend module, data layer"
features:
- ENGINEERING
- CODE_QUALITY
---
# Technical Debt Assessment Skill
Assess technical debt in **{{ repository }}** — scope: **{{ assessment_scope }}**.
## Workflow
### Phase 1 — Code Quality Metrics
```
CODE METRICS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Lines of code: ___
[ ] Cyclomatic complexity (average): ___
[ ] Files with complexity > 20: ___
[ ] Duplicated code blocks: ___
[ ] Code smells (linter warnings): ___
[ ] Test coverage: ___%
[ ] Files with 0% coverage: ___
[ ] TODO/HACK/FIXME comments: ___
[ ] Dead code identified: ___ files / ___ functions
```
### Phase 2 — Architecture Assessment
```
ARCHITECTURE DEBT
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Circular dependencies: ___
[ ] God classes/modules (> 500 lines): ___
[ ] Tight coupling indicators:
- Direct database access outside data layer: ___
- Hard-coded service URLs: ___
- Shared mutable state: ___
[ ] Missing abstractions:
- ___
- ___
[ ] Inconsistent patterns:
- ___
- ___
[ ] Deprecated patterns still in use: ___
```
### Phase 3 — Dependency Health
```
DEPENDENCY ANALYSIS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Total dependencies: ___
[ ] Outdated dependencies:
- Major version behind: ___
- Minor version behind: ___
- Patch version behind: ___
[ ] Dependencies with known vulnerabilities: ___
- Critical: ___
- High: ___
- Medium: ___
[ ] Unmaintained dependencies (no release in 12+ months): ___
[ ] License compliance issues: ___
```
### Phase 4 — Testing Gaps
```
TEST DEBT
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Unit test coverage: ___%
[ ] Integration test coverage: ___%
[ ] Critical paths without tests:
- ___
- ___
[ ] Flaky tests: ___
[ ] Slow tests (> 10s): ___
[ ] Missing test categories:
[ ] Contract tests
[ ] Load tests
[ ] Security tests
[ ] Chaos tests
```
### Phase 5 — Debt Categorization
```
TECHNICAL DEBT INVENTORY
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Category | Items | Severity | Business Impact | Effort
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━|━━━━━━━|━━━━━━━━━━|━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━|━━━━━━
Code quality | | | |
Architecture | | | |
Dependencies | | | |
Testing | | | |
Documentation | | | |
Infrastructure | | | |
Security | | | |
PRIORITY MATRIX
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
High Business Impact Low Business Impact
High Effort | PLAN (schedule) | DEFER
Low Effort | DO NOW | BATCH (group with other work)
```
### Phase 6 — Remediation Backlog
```
PRIORITIZED REMEDIATION
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Sprint 1 (Quick Wins):
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
Sprint 2-3 (Planned Work):
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
Quarterly Goals:
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
[ ] ___ — effort: ___ impact: ___
Tracked but Deferred:
[ ] ___ — reason: ___
[ ] ___ — reason: ___
```
## Counter-Rationalizations
| Shortcut | Counter | Why |
|----------|---------|-----|
| "We can skip some steps for this case" | Adapt the workflow steps, don't skip them | Skipped steps are where incidents and oversights originate |
| "The user seems to already know what to do" | Complete all workflow phases with the user | The workflow catches blind spots that experience alone misses |
| "This is a minor case, full process is overkill" | Scale the process down, don't turn it off | Minor cases become major when unstructured; the process scales, not disappears |
| "I'll fill in the details later" | Complete each section before moving on | Deferred details are forgotten; real-time capture is more accurate |
| "The template output isn't necessary" | Always produce the structured output format | Structured output enables comparison, audit trails, and handoff to other teams |
## Output Format
Produce a technical debt assessment report with:
1. **Debt summary** (total items, severity distribution, debt score)
2. **Category breakdown** (code, architecture, dependencies, testing)
3. **Priority matrix** (impact vs effort classification)
4. **Remediation backlog** (prioritized action items with estimates)
5. **Recommendations** (process changes to prevent future debt accumulation)
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!