# Smaqit Session Assess > Critical assessment skill for handling ambiguous requirements, conflicting inputs, and insufficient detail in complex planning scenarios. Provides approval gate with iterative refinement to prevent wasted execution on poor-quality inputs. Invoke when user explicitly requests assessment using words "assess" or "assessment" or when requirements are ambiguous, conflicting, or underspecified. Use when this capability is needed. - Skill: `tomevault-io/smaqit-session-assess` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add tomevault-io/smaqit-session-assess` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/tomevault-io/smaqit-session-assess/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/smaqit-session-assess --- # Session Assess Perform critical assessment before taking action. ## Steps 1. **Question the premise** - Is this request necessary? - Does it duplicate existing work? - Could it create maintenance burden? - Are there hidden assumptions in the framing? 2. **Check existing state** - Read relevant files FIRST to understand what already exists - Search for similar patterns or implementations - Verify the problem actually exists as described - Don't guess at current state—empirically verify 3. **Identify trade-offs** - What are the downsides of this approach? - What alternatives exist? - Which option is better and why? - What costs (tokens, complexity, maintenance) are involved? 4. **Flag problems upfront** - If you see flaws, state them clearly BEFORE proceeding - Surface redundancy or conflicts with existing patterns - Identify better approaches if they exist - Question whether simpler solutions would suffice 5. **Present assessment and ask for direction** - Summarize findings with clear rationale - Present alternatives with cost-benefit analysis - Request confirmation before proceeding - Don't assume user's framing is complete/correct ## Scope Apply this assessment to: - Simple refactorings (check if they duplicate existing patterns) - Documentation updates (verify target location and existing content) - New features (question whether they're needed or if existing solutions suffice) - "Clean up X" requests (ask "relative to what? what's the duplication source?") - Configuration changes (verify they don't break conventions or stability) ## Critical Failures to Avoid - Immediately executing without checking existing files - Assuming user's framing is complete/correct - Creating new content before verifying it doesn't already exist - Treating normal-seeming requests as safe without analysis ## Stop and Explain Risks Before implementing anything that: - Modifies user configuration files (dotfiles, shell configs) - Violates security best practices - Breaks established conventions without clear justification - Could affect system stability or user experience negatively - Duplicates existing functionality in another location --- > Converted and distributed by [TomeVault](https://tomevault.io/claim/ruifrvaz) — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.