codebase-analysis

Before you plan anything non-trivial, you need to actually understand the codebase. Not impressions -- evidence. The analyze skill forces systematic investigation with structured phases and explicit evidence requirements.

| Phase | Actions | | ---------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | Exploration | Delegate to Explore agent; process structure, tech stack, patterns | | Focus Selection | Classify areas (architecture, performance, security, quality); assign P1/P2/P3 | | Investigation Planning | Commit to specific files and questions; create accountability contract | | Deep Analysis | Progressive investigation; document with file:line + quoted code | | Verification | Audit completeness; ensure all commitments addressed | | Synthesis | Consolidate by severity; provide prioritized recommendations |

When to Use

Four scenarios where this matters:

• Unfamiliar codebase -- You cannot plan what you do not understand. Period.
• Security review -- Vulnerability assessment requires systematic coverage, not "I looked around and it seems fine."
• Performance analysis -- Before optimization, know where time actually goes, not where you assume it goes.
• Architecture evaluation -- Major refactors deserve evidence-backed understanding, not vibes.

When to Skip

Not everything needs this level of rigor:

• You already understand the codebase well
• Simple bug fix with obvious scope
• User has provided comprehensive context

The astute reader will notice all three skip conditions share a trait: you already have the evidence. The skill exists for when you do not.

Example Usage

Use your analyze skill to understand this codebase.
Focus on security and architecture before we plan the authentication refactor.

The skill outputs findings organized by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW), each with file:line references and quoted code. This feeds directly into planning -- you have evidence-backed understanding before proposing changes.