125 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
125 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
tags: ["workflow", "quality", "assessment", "validation"]
|
|
description: "Comprehensive quality assessment with multi-agent coordination"
|
|
argument-hint: "[--focus AREA]"
|
|
allowed-tools: ["Read", "Write", "Edit", "MultiEdit", "Bash", "Grep", "Glob", "TodoWrite", "Task"]
|
|
model: claude-sonnet-4-5
|
|
references_guidelines:
|
|
- docs/development/workflows/quality-gates.md # Quality dimensions, thresholds, validation rules
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# /quality Command
|
|
|
|
**WHAT**: Comprehensive quality assessment across code quality, security, performance, testing, and documentation.
|
|
|
|
**WHY**: Ensure consistent quality standards throughout development with multi-agent analysis and actionable recommendations.
|
|
|
|
**HOW**: Coordinate specialized agents (code-reviewer, security-auditor, performance-optimizer, test-engineer) to analyze the codebase and provide improvement recommendations.
|
|
|
|
## Usage
|
|
|
|
```bash
|
|
/quality # Comprehensive quality assessment (all dimensions)
|
|
/quality --focus security # Focus on security analysis
|
|
/quality --focus performance # Focus on performance analysis
|
|
/quality --focus testing # Focus on test coverage and quality
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## How It Works
|
|
|
|
1. **Read Quality Configuration** - Load quality dimensions and thresholds from `docs/development/workflows/quality-gates.md`
|
|
2. **Analyze Codebase** - Coordinate specialized agents based on focus area or run comprehensive analysis
|
|
3. **Generate Report** - Provide actionable recommendations with priority levels
|
|
4. **Suggest Improvements** - Offer specific fixes and refactoring suggestions
|
|
|
|
## Quality Dimensions
|
|
|
|
**Default dimensions** (configured in `quality-gates.md`):
|
|
|
|
- **Code Quality** - Maintainability, complexity, best practices (code-reviewer)
|
|
- **Security** - Vulnerabilities, OWASP compliance (security-auditor)
|
|
- **Performance** - Bottlenecks, optimization opportunities (performance-optimizer)
|
|
- **Testing** - Coverage, test quality, effectiveness (test-engineer)
|
|
- **Documentation** - Completeness, accuracy (technical-writer)
|
|
|
|
## Focus Areas
|
|
|
|
Use `--focus` to target specific quality dimensions:
|
|
|
|
- `security` - OWASP Top 10, vulnerabilities, auth/data protection
|
|
- `performance` - N+1 queries, inefficient algorithms, bottlenecks
|
|
- `testing` - Coverage analysis, test quality, missing tests
|
|
- `code` - Code quality, complexity, maintainability
|
|
- `docs` - Documentation completeness and accuracy
|
|
|
|
**No flag = Comprehensive analysis across all dimensions**
|
|
|
|
## When to Use
|
|
|
|
**During Development:**
|
|
- Before merging to staging/production
|
|
- After completing a task
|
|
- When quality concerns arise
|
|
|
|
**Regular Checks:**
|
|
- Weekly quality reviews
|
|
- Pre-release validation
|
|
- After major refactoring
|
|
|
|
**Targeted Analysis:**
|
|
- Security review before auth changes
|
|
- Performance check after data layer changes
|
|
- Test coverage validation after feature addition
|
|
|
|
## Example Output
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Quality Assessment Report
|
|
=========================
|
|
|
|
Code Quality: 87/100 ✅
|
|
- 3 high-complexity functions identified
|
|
- Recommendation: Refactor UserService.validateCredentials()
|
|
|
|
Security: 92/100 ✅
|
|
- 1 medium-severity issue: SQL injection risk in search endpoint
|
|
- Recommendation: Use parameterized queries
|
|
|
|
Performance: 78/100 ⚠️
|
|
- N+1 query detected in /api/users endpoint
|
|
- Recommendation: Add eager loading for user.posts
|
|
|
|
Testing: 85/100 ✅
|
|
- Coverage: 82% (target: 80%)
|
|
- 12 untested edge cases identified
|
|
|
|
Documentation: 90/100 ✅
|
|
- API endpoints documented
|
|
- Missing: Error response examples
|
|
|
|
Overall: 86/100 ✅
|
|
Priority Actions:
|
|
1. Fix SQL injection in search (CRITICAL)
|
|
2. Optimize /api/users N+1 query (HIGH)
|
|
3. Refactor high-complexity functions (MEDIUM)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Benefits
|
|
|
|
✅ **Single Command**: No complex subcommands or flags
|
|
✅ **Comprehensive by Default**: Analyzes all quality dimensions
|
|
✅ **Targeted When Needed**: Optional focus for specific concerns
|
|
✅ **Actionable Output**: Specific recommendations with priority
|
|
✅ **Multi-Agent Coordination**: Leverages specialized domain experts
|
|
✅ **Configuration-Driven**: Adapts to your quality standards via quality-gates.md
|
|
|
|
## Integration
|
|
|
|
**With `/implement`**: Quality checks run automatically during implementation phases
|
|
|
|
**With `/sanity-check`**: Use for quick quality validation mid-development
|
|
|
|
**With `/security-audit`**: For deeper OWASP compliance and penetration testing
|
|
|
|
**Before `/branch merge`**: Run comprehensive quality check before merging to staging/production
|