/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

/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

Read Quality Configuration - Load quality dimensions and thresholds from docs/development/workflows/quality-gates.md
Analyze Codebase - Coordinate specialized agents based on focus area or run comprehensive analysis
Generate Report - Provide actionable recommendations with priority levels
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

4.3 KiB Raw Blame History