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