Individual skill
archify-review
Review Archify issues, PRs, or code through value, cost, and impact to support evidence-based maintenance decisions. Use for issue triage, change reviews, and code quality assessments.
skills-imported/archify-review/SKILL.md
Source commit faf37c0859ebf627bfcb5225e8057d088691e0ae
What was checked
- Matches the observed repository HEAD
- Yes
- Scanner rules are current
- No
- Repository scan complete
- No
- Skill scan complete
- Yes
- Observed behavior
- Not checked yet
- Last checked
- Nov 8, 2026
These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.
Install this skill
Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.
An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.
Repository context
- Repository stars (not skill ratings)
- 54
- Repository last updated
- Oct 10, 2026
- License
- MIT
Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.
- agent-skills Repository topic
- ai-agents Repository topic
- ai-agents-automation Repository topic
- ai-skills Repository topic
- awesome Repository topic
- awesome-list Repository topic
- chatgpt Repository topic
- claude-skills Repository topic
- meta-ai Repository topic
- muse-ai Repository topic
- engineering Derived category
Files and excerpt
File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.
Browse files
SKILL.mdcore · 1,631 bytes
Read excerpt
# Archify Review
Judge whether a problem is worth addressing and an approach is worth maintaining over time.
- **Value**: Identify the real problem, who benefits, how often it occurs, its consequences, and whether it is worth addressing now.
- **Cost**: Consider implementation and verification effort, along with the future cost of understanding, changing, and maintaining the code. Prefer existing capabilities and keep the solution proportional to the problem.
- **Impact**: Identify affected behavior and modules, consequences for users and future development, and whether the change improves maintainability or adds coupling and constraints.
Consider maintainability, complexity, compatibility, performance, and other relevant concerns within these three dimensions, according to the specific problem.
Ground judgments in evidence: verify the target revision and relevant facts, distinguish direct verification from existing evidence and assumptions, and choose checks that resolve the key uncertainties.
Explain whether the work is worthwhile, the approach's cost and impact, any better alternatives, and unresolved questions that matter to the decision. Give reasons and scale the detail to the importance of each concern.