Complexity And Code Health Analyzer

Complexity and Code Health Analyzer

Identify structural hotspots by combining complexity, connascence, and churn data.

When to Use

• Routine code quality audits
• Pre-refactor planning
• CI gates for complexity thresholds
• Volatility and technical-debt reviews

Scope

• Scans: public methods and classes, cross-module call sites, static connascence signals, and version-control churn for hotspot detection.
• Exclusions: generated files, vendor code, and intentionally large benchmark or load-test scripts unless they also show material structural risk.
• Fallback: if complexity and churn signals disagree, fall back to the shared conventions scoring order and downgrade to warning when confidence is low.
• Routing: defer public-interface coupling to Integration Strength and Micro-Coupling Evaluator and module-level dependency health to Structural Coupling and Volatility Analyzer.

Workflow

1. Calculate complexity.
   • Compute cyclomatic and cognitive complexity for public methods and classes.
   • Flag god classes and threshold violations.
2. Evaluate static connascence.
   • Detect position, meaning, and type coupling.
   • Flag magic numbers, brittle argument ordering, and dynamic typing across boundaries.
3. Overlay churn.
   • Compute separate scores for structural complexity and version-control volatility.
   • Flag critical hotspots only when both scores are materially high or when one score is extreme and the other is non-trivial.
   • Treat large but stable benchmark/load scripts as operational hotspots, not automatically as architectural debt.
4. Report findings.
   • Return the most complex methods and classes.
   • Include both complexity and volatility scores, plus a combined hotspot classification.

Rules

• Use static analysis, AST parsing, and version-control logs only.
• Keep the analysis deterministic and language-agnostic.
• Use team-defined thresholds when available.
• Do not label a file as a critical hotspot from size alone.
• If a file is large but historically stable, downgrade to warning unless the code is also structurally complex.

Shared Conventions

• Follow the repository-wide conventions in shared-skill-conventions.
• Use the canonical output contract, severity levels, confidence rubric, routing rules, and false-positive downgrades defined there.
• If this skill is not the closest match, defer to the routing guidance in the shared conventions file.

Output

Return:

• Top complex methods and classes
• Critical hotspots from complexity/churn overlay
• Static connascence findings
• CI-ready pass or fail output