Tech Debt

Port provenance: adapted from the pinned upstream source at 984023ddac0d5e27624f2baacde6105e45de375f under MIT; see the repository parity ledger for the exact path and blob.

Phase 1: Parse Subcommand

Determine the mode from the argument:

• scan — Scan the codebase for tech debt indicators
• add — Add a new tech debt entry manually
• prioritize — Re-prioritize the existing debt register
• report — Generate a summary report of current debt status

If no subcommand is provided, output usage and stop. Verdict: FAIL — missing required subcommand.

Phase 2A: Scan Mode

Search the codebase for debt indicators:

• TODO comments (count and categorize)
• FIXME comments (these are bugs disguised as debt)
• HACK comments (workarounds that need proper solutions)
• @deprecated markers
• Duplicated code blocks (similar patterns in multiple files)
• Files over 500 lines (potential god objects)
• Functions over 50 lines (potential complexity)

Categorize each finding:

• Architecture Debt: Wrong abstractions, missing patterns, coupling issues
• Code Quality Debt: Duplication, complexity, naming, missing types
• Test Debt: Missing tests, flaky tests, untested edge cases
• Documentation Debt: Missing docs, outdated docs, undocumented APIs
• Dependency Debt: Outdated packages, deprecated APIs, version conflicts
• Performance Debt: Known slow paths, unoptimized queries, memory issues

Present the findings to the user.

Ask: "May I write these findings to docs/tech-debt-register.md?"

If yes, update the register (append new entries, do not overwrite existing ones). Verdict: COMPLETE — scan findings written to register.

If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.

Phase 2B: Add Mode

Ask the user for the description, affected files, and impact if left unfixed (plain text prompts).

Then use the available user-input mechanism to collect the category:

• Prompt: "What category does this tech debt belong to?"
• Options:
  • [A] Architecture Debt — wrong abstractions, missing patterns, coupling issues
  • [B] Code Quality Debt — duplication, complexity, naming, missing types
  • [C] Test Debt — missing tests, flaky tests, untested edge cases
  • [D] Documentation Debt — missing/outdated docs, undocumented APIs
  • [E] Dependency Debt — outdated packages, deprecated APIs, version conflicts
  • [F] Performance Debt — known slow paths, memory issues, unoptimized queries

Then use the available user-input mechanism to collect the estimated fix effort:

• Prompt: "What is the estimated effort to fix this item?"
• Options:
  • [A] S — Small (under 1 day)
  • [B] M — Medium (1–3 days)
  • [C] L — Large (3–7 days)
  • [D] XL — Extra Large (over 1 week)

Present the complete new entry to the user.

Ask: "May I append this entry to docs/tech-debt-register.md?"

If yes, append the entry. Verdict: COMPLETE — entry added to register.

If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.

Phase 2C: Prioritize Mode

Read the debt register at docs/tech-debt-register.md.

Score each item by: (impact_if_unfixed × frequency_of_encounter) / fix_effort

Re-sort the register by priority score and recommend which items to include in the next sprint.

Present the re-prioritized register to the user.

Ask: "May I write the re-prioritized register back to docs/tech-debt-register.md?"

If yes, write the updated file. Verdict: COMPLETE — register re-prioritized and saved.

If no, stop here. Verdict: BLOCKED — user declined write.

Phase 2D: Report Mode

Read the debt register. Generate summary statistics:

• Total items by category
• Total estimated fix effort
• Items added vs resolved since last report
• Trending direction (growing / stable / shrinking)

Flag any items that have been in the register for more than 3 sprints.

Output the report to the user. This mode is read-only — no files are written. Verdict: COMPLETE — debt report generated.

Phase 3: Next Steps

• Run $ai-game-studio:sprint-plan to schedule high-priority debt items into the next sprint.
• Run $ai-game-studio:tech-debt report at the start of each sprint to track debt trends over time.

Debt Register Format

## Technical Debt Register
Last updated: [Date]
Total items: [N] | Estimated total effort: [T-shirt sizes summed]

| ID | Category | Description | Files | Effort | Impact | Priority | Added | Sprint |
|----|----------|-------------|-------|--------|--------|----------|-------|--------|
| TD-001 | [Cat] | [Description] | [files] | [S/M/L/XL] | [Low/Med/High/Critical] | [Score] | [Date] | [Sprint to fix or "Backlog"] |

Rules

• Tech debt is not inherently bad — it is a tool. The register tracks conscious decisions.
• Every debt entry must explain WHY it was accepted (deadline, prototype, missing info)
• "Scan" should run at least once per sprint to catch new debt
• Items older than 3 sprints without action should either be fixed or consciously accepted with a documented reason

Codex portability

Use the search, file-editing, shell, user-input, and subagent capabilities available in the active Codex surface. Use PowerShell syntax on Windows and POSIX syntax on macOS/Linux; do not require a Unix compatibility layer on Windows. Inherit the active model and permission mode, and do not weaken approval or sandbox boundaries.