Implements intelligent analyze project with multi-factor skill selection,
Scanned 9/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add paulpas/agent-skill-router --skill analyze-project --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Analyze Project?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/paulpas-analyze-project)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: analyze-project
compatibility: opencode
completeness: 95
content-types:
- guidance
- examples
- do-dont
description: Implements intelligent analyze project with multi-factor skill selection,
fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense
license: MIT
maturity: stable
metadata:
domain: agent
output-format: analysis
related-skills: agent-confidence-based-selector, agent-task-routing
role: orchestration
scope: orchestration
triggers: analyze-project, analyze project, how do i analyze-project, orchestrate
analyze-project, automate analyze-project, agent analyze-project
archetypes:
- orchestration
- strategic
anti_triggers:
- brainstorming
- vague ideation
- single-agent monolith
response_profile:
verbosity: medium
directive_strength: high
abstraction_level: tactical
version: "1.0.0"
---
# Analyze Project
Orchestrates intelligent skill selection and execution for analyze project workflows. Applies the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense to guide data naturally through the orchestration pipeline, preventing errors before they occur. Selects optimal skills based on multi-factor scoring including text similarity, historical performance, and system availability.
## TL;DR Checklist
- [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Orchestration Flow │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
User Request
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Parse Request │
│ & Extract │
│ Features │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Evaluate Available Skills │
│ │
│ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │
│ │ Skill A │ │ Skill B │ │ Skill C │ │
│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │
│ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │
│ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │
│ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ └─────────────────┴─────────────────┘ │
│ ↓ │
│ Select Best Skill │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Execute Skill │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Handle Result │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Error Handling & Fallback │
│ │
│ Success? ────────► Return Result │
│ │
│ Fail? ────────┐ │
│ ↓ │
│ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Fallback Chain │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ 1. Retry with adjusted parameters │ │
│ │ 2. Try Alternative Skill (if available) │ │
│ │ 3. Defer to Human Operator (if critical) │ │
│ │ 4. Log & Return Error │ │
│ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
## When to Use
Use this skill when:
- Orchestrating multi-step workflows that require skill delegation
- Implementing adaptive skill routing based on confidence scores
- Building fallback mechanisms for failed skill executions
- Creating intelligent task decomposition and parallel execution
- Designing skill dependency graphs with automatic resolution
- Implementing skill selection with historical performance weighting
- Building agent systems that need to self-organize around tasks
## When NOT to Use
Avoid this skill for:
- Direct task execution without orchestration needs - use individual skills instead
- High-frequency trading scenarios where latency must be minimized - the selection overhead may be prohibitive
- Simple linear workflows without branching or fallback requirements
- Cases where skill metadata is unavailable or unreliable
## Core Workflow
1. **Parse and Analyze Request** - Extract intent, entities, and constraints from user input.
**Checkpoint:** All required parameters must be present and in valid format before proceeding.
2. **Score Available Skills** - Calculate match scores using multi-factor algorithm:
- Text similarity between request and skill triggers
- Historical success rate for similar tasks
- Skill availability and health status
- Required dependencies and their availability
**Checkpoint:** Skip to fallback if no skill scores above threshold.
3. **Select Optimal Skill** - Choose skill with highest score that meets minimum confidence.
**Checkpoint:** Verify skill has not been disabled or deprecated.
4. **Execute with Fallback** - Run skill execution wrapped in retry and fallback logic.
**Checkpoint:** Log all execution attempts for audit trail.
5. **Return or Fallback** - Either return successful result or apply fallback chain:
- Retry with adjusted parameters
- Try alternative skill from `related-skills`
- Defer to human operator for critical tasks
**Checkpoint:** Record outcome with timing and confidence metadata.
## Implementation Patterns
### Pattern 1: Skill Selection Logic
```python
def select_analysis_skill(
project_root: Path,
tech_stack: Dict[str, Any],
available_analyses: List[Dict]
) -> Optional[Dict]:
"""Select the optimal analysis skill based on project structure and tech stack.
Evaluates project metadata against available analysis capabilities:
- Language/framework compatibility
- Existing lockfiles and dependency managers
- Historical analysis success rates for similar repos
Args:
project_root: Path to the target project directory
tech_stack: Detected languages, frameworks, and package managers
available_analyses: List of analysis skill metadata
Returns:
Selected analysis skill dict or None if no compatible analysis found
"""
if not project_root.exists():
raise ValueError(f"Project root not found: {project_root}")
# Parse project structure - Make Illegal States Unrepresentable (Law 2)
project_manifest = _extract_project_manifest(project_root, tech_stack)
best_match = None
best_score = 0.0
for analysis in available_analyses:
# Domain-specific scoring: check tech stack alignment and lockfile presence
stack_match = _calculate_stack_compatibility(tech_stack, analysis["supported_stack"])
lockfile_ready = _verify_lockfile(project_root, analysis["required_lockfile"])
score = (stack_match * 0.6) + (lockfile_ready * 0.4)
if score > best_score and score >= 0.75:
best_score = score
best_match = analysis
if best_match is None:
return None
# Atomic Predictability (Law 3) - Return new dict, don't mutate inputs
result = dict(best_match)
result["project_context"] = project_manifest
result["selection_confidence"] = best_score
return result
```
### Pattern 2: Execution with Fallback
```python
def execute_analysis_pipeline(
analysis_skill: Dict,
project_context: Dict,
fallback_analyses: List[Dict]
) -> Dict:
"""Execute a project analysis with domain-specific fallback chains.
Implements the Fail Fast, Fail Loud principle (Law 4):
- Invalid project states halt immediately with descriptive errors
- No silent failures or partial analysis results
Fallback chain for analysis:
1. Retry with adjusted analysis depth/timeout
2. Try alternative analysis tool (e.g., yarn -> npm -> pnpm)
3. Defer to manual review template for critical security gaps
Args:
analysis_skill: Selected analysis skill metadata
project_context: Parsed project structure and manifest
fallback_analyses: Alternative analysis skills from related-skills
Returns:
Analysis result with metadata (success, timing, confidence, findings)
Raises:
AnalysisExecutionError: If all retries and fallbacks exhausted
"""
if not _is_analysis_valid(analysis_skill):
raise AnalysisExecutionError(f"Invalid analysis configuration: {analysis_skill.get('name')}")
# Parse context - Ensure trusted state (Law 2)
validated_project = _validate_project_structure(project_context)
for attempt in range(3):
try:
result = _run_analysis_tool(analysis_skill, validated_project)
# Success - Atomic Predictability (Law 3)
return {
"success": True,
"analysis_type": analysis_skill["name"],
"findings": result["findings"],
"attempts": attempt + 1,
"latency_ms": _calculate_latency(),
"confidence": result["confidence"]
}
except ProjectStructureError as e:
# Fail Fast - Don't try to patch malformed project data (Law 4)
raise AnalysisExecutionError(
f"Invalid project structure for {analysis_skill['name']}: {str(e)}"
) from e
except ToolExecutionError as e:
# Transient tool failure - try fallback analysis
if attempt == 2:
return _apply_analysis_fallback(analysis_skill, validated_project, fallback_analyses)
# All retries exhausted - Fail Loud (Law 4)
raise AnalysisExecutionError(
f"Failed to complete {analysis_skill['name']} analysis after 3 attempts"
)
```
### MUST DO
- Always validate skill metadata before selection (Early Exit)
- Implement fallback chain with at least 2 levels (Fallback Skill + Human)
- Log all skill selections with full context for auditability
- Return new data structures instead of mutating inputs (Atomic Predictability)
- Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states
- Update confidence scores after each execution for adaptive routing
- Reference `code-philosophy` (5 Laws of Elegant Defense) in all logic
### MUST NOT DO
- Select skills based on a single factor (e.g., only confidence score)
- Disable fallback mechanisms "temporarily" - this creates fragile systems
- Skip validation of skill dependencies before execution
- Return partial results - either complete success or clear failure
- Use magic numbers for confidence thresholds - make them configurable
- Cache skill selections without considering context changes
## TL;DR Checklist
- [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
## TL;DR for Code Generation
- Use guard clauses - return early on invalid input before doing work
- Return simple types (dict, str, int, bool, list) - avoid complex nested objects
- Cyclomatic complexity < 10 per function - split anything larger
- Handle null/empty cases explicitly at function top (Early Exit)
- Never mutate input parameters - return new dicts/objects
- Fail fast with descriptive errors - don't try to "patch" bad data
- Reference code-philosophy laws in comments for complex logic
- Include timing and confidence metadata in all return values
## Output Template
When applying this skill, produce:
1. **Selected Skills** - List of skill names with confidence scores
2. **Selection Rationale** - Why each skill was chosen (match score, history, availability)
3. **Execution Plan** - Order of execution with dependencies
4. **Fallback Strategy** - Which fallback skills will be tried and in what order
5. **Risk Assessment** - Any potential failure points and their impact
6. **Timing Estimates** - Expected latency including fallback scenarios
---
---
## Constraints
### MUST DO
- Define clear input/output contracts for every step in the orchestration flow with explicit validation
- Implement structured logging at each stage capturing context, inputs, outputs, timing, and errors
- Build in fallback paths: if the primary strategy fails, degrade gracefully to a simpler approach
- Validate all preconditions before starting — do not proceed if required resources or permissions are missing
### MUST NOT DO
- Do not create deep nesting of orchestration steps (>5 levels) — flatten workflows where possible
- Avoid silent failure modes: every step must either succeed, fail explicitly, or escalate to a higher handler
- Never use shared mutable state between parallel workflow branches — communicate via immutable messages only
- Do not hardcode execution order when the dependency graph naturally determines it; derive order from explicit dependencies
## Live References
> Authoritative documentation links for this skill's domain. The model follows markdown links at load time to resolve external references and inline content.
- [SAST Security Scanning Overview](<https://owasp.org/www-community/vulnerabilities/>)
- [OWASP Top 10 Web Application Risks](<https://owasp.org/www-project-top-ten/>)
- [Cyclomatic Complexity (Wikipedia)](<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclomatic_complexity>)
- [Dependency Analysis Tools Comparison](<https://deps.dev/>)
- [Software Architecture Assessment Patterns](<https://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=2982163>)
## Related Skills
| Skill | Purpose |
|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!