# Artemiopadilla Claude Triforce Template Code Health

> Run a comprehensive code health scan on the codebase.

- Skill: `tomevault-io/artemiopadilla-claude-triforce-template-code-health` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/artemiopadilla-claude-triforce-template-code-health`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/artemiopadilla-claude-triforce-template-code-health/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: tomevault-io (https://skillmd.com/u/tomevault-io)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/tomevault-io/artemiopadilla-claude-triforce-template-code-health

---


Run a comprehensive code health scan on the codebase.

Follow these steps:

**SIGN IN:**
- Run the SIGN IN checklist from your agent file
- Note any areas of concern based on past scans

**SCAN -- Quality Attribute Assessment (FURPS):**

Organize findings by quality attribute category (FURPS model, Hewlett-Packard):

**F -- Functionality:**
1. Scan for dead code:
   - Unused imports: `ruff check --select F401 src/` or `biome lint src/`
   - Unused variables/functions: grep for definitions not referenced elsewhere
   - Commented-out code blocks: search for patterns spanning 3+ lines
   - Unreachable code after return/throw/break/continue
   - Files not imported by any other file

**R -- Reliability:**
2. Scan for flaky test indicators:
   - Tests depending on timing (`sleep`, `setTimeout`, fixed delays)
   - Tests sharing mutable state between test cases
   - Tests making real network calls without mocking
   - Tests depending on filesystem paths or system-specific state
   - Non-deterministic assertions (floating point equality without tolerance, random data without seeding)
3. Check for outdated dependencies:
   - `pip list --outdated` or `npm outdated`
   - Known vulnerabilities: `pip audit` or `npm audit`

**P -- Performance (complexity proxies):**
4. Scan for Clean Code violations:
   - Functions longer than 30 lines
   - Files longer than 300 lines
   - Deeply nested code (>3 levels of indentation)
   - Duplicated logic blocks (DRY violations)
   - Primitive obsession (raw strings/ints where a domain type belongs)
   - Feature envy (methods that use another class's data more than their own)
   - God classes (classes with too many responsibilities)

**S -- Supportability:**
5. Verify architecture compliance:
   - Dependency direction: does business logic depend on frameworks or infrastructure?
   - Layer leakage: are there imports that cross architectural boundaries incorrectly?
   - Screaming Architecture: does folder structure reveal intent?
6. Check TODO/FIXME comments — do they have issue references?
7. Check for missing docstrings on public API functions: any function or class without a leading underscore in `src/` files that lacks a docstring. Excludes test files and internal helpers (functions starting with `_`).

Note: **U (Usability)** is not assessed at code-health level -- this is a product concern owned by Prometeo.

### Cost of Quality (COPQ) Classification

Categorize each finding by cost type (Feigenbaum 1956, O'Regan 2019):

- **Prevention cost**: Items that prevent defects if addressed (test coverage gaps, missing type hints, missing docstrings)
- **Appraisal cost**: Items that affect defect detection capability (flaky tests, weak assertions, inadequate test isolation)
- **Internal failure cost**: Defects already present, found internally (dead code, broken imports, architecture violations)
- **External failure cost**: Issues that could escape to users if not addressed (security vulnerabilities, missing error handling, unvalidated inputs)

In the code-health report, tag each finding with its FURPS category and COPQ type. Reports heavy on "external failure" items are more urgent than those with mostly "prevention" items.

References: FURPS (Hewlett-Packard), cited in Callejas-Cuervo et al. (2017). COPQ (Feigenbaum 1956), presented in O'Regan (2019) Ch. 9.3.5.

**⏸️ TIME OUT — Scan Complete Checklist (DO-CONFIRM):**
- [ ] All source directories scanned (not just `src/` — also `tests/`, config files)
- [ ] Dead code findings verified (not false positives from dynamic imports or plugins)
- [ ] Dependency vulnerabilities checked with automated tools
- [ ] Flaky test indicators checked (timing, shared state, network, non-determinism)
- [ ] Findings prioritized: Critical > Warning > Suggestion
- [ ] Previous scan findings compared — are old issues resolved or recurring?

**SIGN OUT:**
6. Write findings to `docs/reviews/code-health-{date}.md`
7. Write the Findings Handoff-to-Forja using the communication checklist
8. Run the SIGN OUT checklist from your agent file

---
> Converted and distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io/claim/artemiopadilla) — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.
<!-- tomevault:4.0:skill_md:2026-04-13 -->