Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Investigation & Analysis

@Nnnsightnnn/claudekit
0
0

Analyze feature requests, refactor plans, or technical decisions to determine investment value and provide recommendations. Use when user mentions investigating, analyzing, or asks "should we build this".

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name Investigation & Analysis
description Analyze feature requests, refactor plans, or technical decisions to determine investment value and provide recommendations. Use when user mentions investigating, analyzing, or asks "should we build this".
allowed-tools Read, Grep, Glob

Investigation & Analysis Skill

Purpose

Analyze feature requests or refactor plans to determine investment value and provide actionable recommendations.

Auto-Activation Triggers

This skill activates when the user:

  • Mentions investigating a feature or idea
  • Asks "should we build this?"
  • Requests feasibility analysis
  • Wants to evaluate ROI or cost/benefit
  • Asks "is this worth doing?"
  • Mentions analyzing a refactor plan

Analysis Process

1. Context Gathering

Automatically check:

  • Review relevant existing code/architecture
  • Search memory patterns for similar work
  • Identify affected components and dependencies
  • Review procedural memory for proven patterns

Tools to use:

  • Grep to search codebase for related functionality
  • Glob to find relevant files
  • Read to examine current implementation

2. Investment Assessment

Evaluate across three dimensions:

Technical Factors

  • Implementation Complexity (1-10 scale)
  • Risk Assessment (breaking changes, dependencies)
  • Technical Debt Impact (reduces/increases/neutral)
  • Performance Implications

Business Factors

  • User Value Delivered
  • Alignment with Project Goals
  • Time to Implement
  • Return on Investment

Strategic Factors

  • Architecture Impact
  • Reusability Potential
  • Future Flexibility

3. Recommendation Framework

Question 1: Is it worth the investment?

  • YES - High value, reasonable cost, low risk
  • NO - Low value, high cost, or high risk
  • CONDITIONAL - Worth it if specific conditions met

Question 2: What should we do with the request?

  • KEEP AS-IS - Plan is solid
  • MODIFY - Suggest specific improvements
  • PIVOT - Recommend alternative approach
  • DEFER - Not now, revisit when [conditions]
  • REJECT - Clear reasons why not

4. Response Format

## Investigation: [Feature/Refactor Name]

### Investment Analysis

**Worth the Investment:** [YES/NO/CONDITIONAL]

[Executive summary in 2-3 sentences]

**Key Metrics:**
- Complexity: [X/10]
- Implementation Time: [estimate]
- Risk Level: [Low/Medium/High]
- Value Delivered: [Low/Medium/High]
- ROI: [High/Medium/Low]

### Recommendation: [KEEP/MODIFY/PIVOT/DEFER/REJECT]

[Detailed explanation with supporting evidence]

#### Technical Analysis
[Key technical findings from codebase investigation]

#### Business Justification
[Value proposition and alignment with goals]

#### Proposed Modifications (if MODIFY)
1. [Specific change with rationale]
2. [Specific change with rationale]

#### Alternative Approach (if PIVOT)
[Description of better approach]

### Implementation Considerations

**Prerequisites:**
- [Required before starting]

**Success Criteria:**
- [Measurable outcome]

**Potential Blockers:**
- [Risk] → Mitigation: [strategy]

### Evidence & References
- Code files examined: [file paths]
- Similar patterns in memory: [references]

Best Practices

1. Be Evidence-Based

  • Reference actual code files examined
  • Cite similar attempts from memory
  • Include metrics where available

2. Be Pragmatic

  • Focus on practical impact
  • Consider current capacity and priorities
  • Balance ideal vs. practical constraints

3. Provide Actionable Guidance

  • Specific next steps if proceeding
  • Clear reasons if not proceeding
  • Measurable success criteria

4. Check Memory First

Always consult:

  • .claude/memory/active/quick-reference.md
  • .claude/memory/active/procedural-memory.md

5. Leverage Existing Work

  • Search for similar features already implemented
  • Identify reusable patterns and components
  • Check if request duplicates existing functionality

Integration

After Investigation:

  • If approved → Suggest /orchestrate-tasks for implementation
  • If complex → Suggest /plan-as-group for collaborative planning

Update Context:

  • Document investigation results
  • Add insights to procedural memory if reusable

Examples

Feature Request

User: "Should we add real-time collaboration to the editor?"

Skill:

  1. Searches codebase for existing editor architecture
  2. Checks memory for similar implementations
  3. Evaluates WebSocket/polling options
  4. Assesses complexity vs. user value
  5. Provides recommendation with implementation path

Refactor Plan

User: "I'm thinking about refactoring to async/await"

Skill:

  1. Examines current implementation
  2. Identifies bottlenecks
  3. Assesses migration complexity and risk
  4. Evaluates performance benefits
  5. Recommends phased approach or alternative

Skill Metadata

Version: 1.0.0 Category: Planning & Decision Support