Claude Code Kit

Project Health Report

Generates a comprehensive project health report covering code quality, architecture, testing, dependencies, and document.

When to Use

Invoke with /project-health-report when:

  • Due diligence assessment of a codebase (acquisition, handoff, audit)
  • Periodic project health check (quarterly review)
  • New team lead onboarding to assess project state
  • Planning a major initiative and need to understand the baseline
  • Stakeholder reporting on technical health

Process

Phase 1: Project Overview

Gather basic project information:

  1. Tech stack — languages, frameworks, databases, infrastructure
  2. Project size — lines of code, number of files, number of modules
  3. Age & activity — git history depth, commit frequency, contributor count
  4. Build & deploy — build system, CI/CD pipeline, deployment targets

Phase 2: Multi-Dimensional Assessment

Run a condensed version of each specialized audit:

Code Quality (from /code-quality-audit)

  • Top 3-5 code smell categories
  • Error handling consistency
  • Naming and readability assessment
  • Overall maintainability score

Architecture (from /architecture-review)

  • Architectural pattern identification
  • SOLID compliance summary
  • Module coupling assessment
  • Scalability concerns

Testing (from /testing-audit)

  • Test coverage level (estimated from test file presence and density)
  • Test quality assessment
  • Testing strategy gaps
  • CI integration status

Dependencies (from /dependency-audit)

  • Dependency count and freshness
  • Known vulnerability count
  • License compatibility status
  • Bloat/redundancy issues

Documentation (from /documentation-audit)

  • README quality
  • API documentation coverage
  • Inline documentation quality
  • Doc-code sync status

Performance (from /performance-audit)

  • Obvious bottleneck patterns
  • Resource management issues
  • Caching strategy assessment

Phase 3: Risk Assessment

Identify project-level risks:

  • Bus factor — how many people understand the critical paths?
  • Technical debt — accumulated shortcuts and workarounds
  • Dependency risk — critical dependencies that are unmaintained or vulnerable
  • Scalability risk — architectural limits that will hit at growth
  • Security risk — vulnerability surface area

Phase 4: Scoring

Rate each dimension on a 5-point scale:

ScoreMeaning
5Excellent — exemplary practices
4Good — solid with minor issues
3Fair — functional but has notable gaps
2Poor — significant issues affecting development
1Critical — fundamental problems requiring immediate attention

Output Format

# Project Health Report

## Project Overview
| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| Tech Stack | [languages, frameworks] |
| Size | [~N lines, M files] |
| Age | [first commit date] |
| Contributors | [N active] |

## Health Dashboard

| Dimension | Score | Status | Key Finding |
|-----------|-------|--------|-------------|
| Code Quality | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| Architecture | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| Testing | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| Dependencies | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| Documentation | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| Performance | N/5 | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... |
| **Overall** | **N/5** | **🟢/🟡/🔴** | |

## Top Risks
1. [Risk + impact + likelihood]
2. ...
3. ...

## Top Recommendations
### Immediate (this week)
1. ...

### Short-term (this month)
1. ...

### Long-term (this quarter)
1. ...

## Detailed Findings

### Code Quality
[Summary of findings, top issues]

### Architecture
[Summary of findings, structural concerns]

### Testing
[Summary of findings, coverage gaps]

### Dependencies
[Summary of findings, update priorities]

### Documentation
[Summary of findings, gaps]

### Performance
[Summary of findings, bottlenecks]

## Conclusion
[1-2 paragraph executive summary: overall health, biggest risk, top priority action]

Notes

  • This is a breadth-first report — for depth on any dimension, use the specialized audit skill
  • Scores are relative assessments, not absolute metrics — a 3/5 for a startup MVP has different implications than for enterprise software
  • The report is a snapshot — recommend periodic re-assessment (quarterly for active projects)
  • For due diligence, combine this report with manual code review of critical paths