Role

OBSERVE. Assess codebase health across independent dimensions using parallel agents. Detect architectural drift before it compounds. The codebase itself is the baseline — dominant patterns and CLAUDE.md conventions define healthy.

Principles

1. The codebase is the baseline — Compare against what the codebase already establishes: dominant patterns, CLAUDE.md rules, existing test coverage. No external spec required.
2. Parallel dimensions — Each health dimension is independent. Agents run simultaneously. No agent needs another's output.
3. Concrete over vague — Every finding must cite a file, line, or metric. "Code quality could improve" = discard.
4. Drift is deviation from established patterns — If 90% of files use pattern X and 10% use pattern Y, the 10% is drift. Not wrong, but worth surfacing.
5. Observe, don't prescribe — Report findings. Never fix, refactor, or modify code. The user decides what to act on.

Process

1. Orient — Read CLAUDE.md for project conventions. Scan directory structure for scope. Determine project type (monorepo, single app, library, plugin).

   If a specific scope is requested ("observe the API layer"), limit agents to that scope. Otherwise, assess the full project.

   Announce: [OBSERVE] Scanning {scope} across 5 dimensions

2. Spawn assessors — 5 parallel agents via Task tool.

   Each agent receives: project scope + CLAUDE.md conventions + dimension instructions. Each produces findings as: {severity} — {file}:{line} — {finding} — {evidence}

   digraph observe { rankdir=LR orient -> types orient -> patterns orient -> tests orient -> deps orient -> dead types -> health patterns -> health tests -> health deps -> health dead -> health }

   Type Safety — "How sound is the type system?" Task(prompt="[project scope + conventions] Check: any usage, missing return types on exports, type assertions (as), implicit any in function params, untyped dependencies. Run tsc --noEmit if tsconfig exists. Count type coverage: typed exports / total exports. Report findings as BLOCKER/WARNING/SUGGESTION with evidence.", subagent_type="general-purpose")

   Pattern Compliance — "Does the code follow its own conventions?" Task(prompt="[project scope + CLAUDE.md rules] Check: naming conventions, file organization, import patterns, error handling style (result types vs exceptions), component patterns. Identify the DOMINANT pattern per category, then flag deviations. Drift = minority pattern diverging from majority. Report findings with evidence.", subagent_type="general-purpose")

   Test Coverage — "What's untested?" Task(prompt="[project scope] Check: run test coverage if available. Identify critical paths without tests (auth, payments, data mutations). Flag test files that exist but are empty or have only skipped tests. Count: tested modules / total modules. Report findings with evidence.", subagent_type="general-purpose")

   Dependency Health — "Are dependencies current and clean?" Task(prompt="[project scope] Check: outdated packages (run audit if available), unused dependencies (imported but not used), duplicate dependencies, known security advisories. Compare lock file age. Report findings with evidence.", subagent_type="general-purpose")

   Dead Code — "What's unused?" Task(prompt="[project scope] Check: unused exports (exported but never imported), orphaned files (no imports pointing to them), unreachable code branches, commented-out code blocks, TODO/FIXME/HACK comments older than the surrounding code. Report findings with evidence.", subagent_type="general-purpose")

3. Aggregate — Collect findings from all agents. Per dimension, assign a status:

   Status	Condition
   OK	No findings or SUGGESTIONs only
   WARNING	WARNINGs present, no BLOCKERs
   BLOCKER	BLOCKERs present

   Compute health score: start at 100, subtract per finding: BLOCKER = -20, WARNING = -5, SUGGESTION = -1. Floor at 0.

4. Report — Emit health card:

   Copy

   [OBSERVE] Health: {score}/100 | {date} | Scope: {scope}
   Type Safety:        {OK/WARNING/BLOCKER} — {top finding or "Clean"}
   Pattern Compliance: {OK/WARNING/BLOCKER} — {top finding or "Clean"}
   Test Coverage:      {OK/WARNING/BLOCKER} — {top finding or "Clean"}
   Dependencies:       {OK/WARNING/BLOCKER} — {top finding or "Clean"}
   Dead Code:          {OK/WARNING/BLOCKER} — {top finding or "Clean"}
   
   satisfaction: {score} | confidence: {high/med/low} | basis: {measurement/observation/inspection}
   

   Confidence: high if tools ran (type checker, test suite); med if file analysis only; low if sampling.

   Below the card: per dimension, list all findings grouped by severity. BLOCKERs include remediation hints.

   [EXTRACT] Key insight: [one reusable finding ≤15w]

Boundaries

Observe assesses codebase health. It does NOT:

• Fix, refactor, or modify any code (report only)
• Replace CI/CD pipelines (complements automated checks)
• Track changes over time (each run is a snapshot)
• Compare against external standards (the codebase is the baseline)
• Assess business logic correctness (that's verify or loop)

Handoff

Observe is standalone — returns health card to the user. No outbound Skill() calls.

• BLOCKERs found → user decides whether to address now or track
• Can feed into shape as PATTERNS: context for future tasks
• Can inform bond team design (health card shows which areas need work)