tech-debt-analysis

tech-debt-analysis is a skill for Claude Code from jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers. It costs 77 tokens per session (1,613 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An evidence-based review of technical debt: the code, tests, architecture, dependencies, and delivery processes that make software harder to change. Technical debt is the future cost created by shortcuts or outdated design.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to audit a repository, find quality and maintenance risks, investigate slow or unreliable tests, assess a planned migration, and create a prioritized refactoring roadmap.
Why use it?
It helps explain why delivery is slowing, tests are flaky, or maintenance is becoming expensive. It separates observable problems from guesses and helps decide what to fix first.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: user-invocable in frontmatter.

Good fit Use it to audit a repository, find quality and maintenance risks, investigate slow or unreliable tests, assess a planned migration, and create a prioritized refactoring roadmap.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers --skill tech-debt-analysis
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for tech-debt-analysis

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for tech-debt-analysis

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers/tech-debt-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 77 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,613 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00077 $0.01613
Opus 5 $0.00039 $0.00807
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00323
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00161

Measured 9d ago against content hash 08fe64153346, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

tech-debt-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

plugins/tech-debt-analysis/skills/tech-debt-analysis/SKILL.md · 188 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 188 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Technical Debt Analysis

Use this skill when a user needs to understand the technical debt in a codebase, test suite, architecture, or delivery process. It is designed for evidence-driven analysis that surfaces the real drivers of delivery drag, quality risk, and maintenance cost, rather than relying on intuition or vague impressions. The output is a structured report that prioritizes debt items based on severity, remediation risk, effort, and ROI, with actionable recommendations for next steps.

When to Use

Use this skill when the user asks for things like:

  • "audit this repository for technical debt"
  • "why is delivery slowing down in this codebase?"
  • "identify the biggest quality risks before we refactor"
  • "analyze why our tests are slow, flaky, or hard to maintain"
  • "prepare a technical debt roadmap for the next quarter"
  • "what should we fix now versus consciously defer?"

Typical scenarios:

  • repo-wide health assessment
  • module-specific debt audit
  • test-suite debt analysis
  • pre-migration or pre-upgrade assessment
  • roadmap planning for refactoring and quality work

Analysis Principles

  • Evidence before verdict - observable signals come first; conclusions come second
  • Debt is a trade-off, not a moral failure - explain the cost, not just the flaw
  • Root cause over symptom - identify why the debt exists, not only where it hurts
  • Risk-aware, not risk-averse - high-risk debt should be surfaced, not politely ignored
  • Incremental remediation - prefer staged fixes with safety nets over heroic rewrites
  • Test debt is first-class debt - unreliable tests damage delivery as much as bad production code
  • Explicit uncertainty - if context is missing, state assumptions rather than bluffing

Analysis Workflow

Follow these phases in order.

Phase 0: Frame the analysis

Before scanning the codebase, clarify:

  • scope: whole repository, subsystem, module, or test layer
  • audience: engineering team, tech lead, QA lead, staff engineer, or management
  • goal: awareness, prioritization, roadmap planning, release risk, or refactor planning
  • constraints: legacy boundaries, compliance, time pressure, "no refactor now", or team capacity
  • pain signals: regressions, slow CI, flaky tests, upgrade blockers, onboarding friction, or architecture sprawl

Read the full file on GitHub · 188 lines

Files

What ships with it

5 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 9d ago First seen · 188 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 08fe64153346

Subscribe to this mod's changes

tech-debt-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository jaktestowac/awesome-copilot-for-testers (113 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 1,613 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.