Use when picking which analysis or project-analysis-* skill fits a request — routes by scope, framework, and symptom — even if the user just says 'analyze this' or 'dig into the codebase'.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add event4u-app/agent-config --skill analysis-skill-router --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Analysis Skill Router?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/event4u-app-analysis-skill-router-agent-config)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
model_tier: high
name: analysis-skill-router
description: "Use when picking which analysis or project-analysis-* skill fits a request — routes by scope, framework, and symptom — even if the user just says 'analyze this' or 'dig into the codebase'."
domain: discovery
workspaces:
- agent-config-maintainer
packs:
- meta
---
# analysis-skill-router
A chooser, not a worker. It answers exactly one question — *which skill* — and
then gets out of the way. How to actually carry out the work belongs to
whichever skill this picks; a chooser that also explains the work reads like
its own fallback target, which is the defect this file was cut back from.
## When to use
Use this skill when:
* A request may need deep analysis
* It is unclear which analysis skill should be used
* Multiple analysis skills could plausibly apply
* The stack/framework is known but the correct analysis path is unclear
* `analysis-autonomous-mode` needs a routing decision
Do NOT use when:
* The correct specialist skill is already obvious
* The task is not an analysis task
* The task is normal implementation work without investigation needs
## Procedure
### 1. Classify the scope
Pick one: full project · architecture review · broad multi-layer debugging ·
framework-specific deep dive · narrow root cause · performance/security
specialist · simple local issue.
**Broad scope requires a reason.** At least one must hold, or the answer is a
narrow specialist: the user asked for breadth · the system is unknown · the
issue spans layers · architecture must be reconstructed · the cause is
non-local.
### 2. Detect the framework
Laravel · Symfony · Zend/Laminas · Node/Express · React · Next.js · unknown or
mixed.
### 3. Read the decision table
| Signal | Route to |
|---|---|
| Full audit, or unclear stack | `universal-project-analysis` |
| Unknown system, discovery-focused | `project-analysis-core` |
| Concrete problem, several plausible causes | `project-analysis-hypothesis-driven` |
| Bug-focused, not full-project | `bug-analyzer` |
| Laravel | `project-analysis-laravel` |
| Symfony | `project-analysis-symfony` |
| Zend/Laminas | `project-analysis-zend-laminas` |
| Node/Express | `project-analysis-node-express` |
| React state / render / hooks | `project-analysis-react` |
| Next.js SSR / cache / hydration | `project-analysis-nextjs` |
| Bottleneck | `performance-analysis` |
| Security concern | `security-audit` |
Tie-break: **the narrowest row that still covers the request wins.**
## Output format
1. The selected skill.
2. The signal from step 1–2 that selected it.
3. Why the next-broader row lost, when one was plausible.
4. Any skill to chain afterwards — or "none".
One or two lines total. A routing verdict longer than the request it routes is
itself a routing failure.
## Examples
| Request | Route |
|---|---|
| "Analyze this whole Laravel project" | `universal-project-analysis`, chain `project-analysis-laravel` |
| "Hydration mismatch in Next.js" | `project-analysis-nextjs` — no full-project step |
| "Could be cache, queue, or a version mismatch" | `project-analysis-hypothesis-driven` |
| "Change one React component" | none — implementation skill |
## Gotcha
* **Size adjectives read as scope.** "Our *whole* Laravel app is slow" picks the
broad row on the word "whole", and the audit then spends its passes
rediscovering a stack the request already named. The step-2 framework signal
outranks size words — those are how frustration sounds, not scope.
* **Breadth feels safe and costs sharpness.** The most expensive choice is
rarely the best one once the problem is already localised.
* **Steps 1 and 2 disagreeing is a question, not a tie-break.** Ask which the
user meant instead of picking the broader row to be safe.
## Do NOT
* Do NOT default to `universal-project-analysis`
* Do NOT choose a generic skill when a framework-specific row fits
* Do NOT confuse discovery with root-cause investigation
* Do NOT re-import procedure, validation checklists, or output contracts from
the skills in the table — that is what this file was cut back from
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!