Project Health Check Scorecard

TL;DR: Conducts a comprehensive project health assessment across 10 vital dimensions: schedule, budget, scope, quality, risk, team, stakeholders, governance, methodology adherence, and strategic alignment. Produces a RAG (Red/Amber/Blue) scorecard with specific findings and remediation recommendations per dimension.

Principio Rector

Un health check no es un status report — es un diagnóstico. El status report dice dónde estás; el health check dice cómo estás. Un proyecto puede ser "on time and budget" and still be unhealthy (team burnout, technical debt accumulating, stakeholder trust eroding). El health check reveals the leading indicators, not just the lagging ones.

Assumptions & Limits

• Assumes project has been executing for ≥1 sprint or ≥1 month to have data for assessment [SUPUESTO]
• Assumes access to schedule, budget, and quality metrics from project management tools [PLAN]
• Breaks when no baseline exists — health cannot be measured without a reference point
• Does not prescribe solutions; it diagnoses. Use specific skills (risk-response-planning, resource-optimization) for remediation
• Assumes team is willing to provide honest feedback on health dimensions [SUPUESTO]
• RAG uses Blue (not Green) per APEX branding standards

Usage

# Full 10-dimension health check
/pm:project-health-check $ARGUMENTS="--project proyecto-alfa --period sprint-8"

# Quick health pulse (top 5 dimensions only)
/pm:project-health-check --type pulse --project proyecto-alfa

# Comparative health check against previous assessment
/pm:project-health-check --type trend --baseline health-check-Q1.md

Parameters:

Parameter	Required	Description
$ARGUMENTS	Yes	Project identifier or path to project data
--type	No	full (default), pulse (5 dimensions), trend (comparative)
--period	No	Assessment period (sprint number or date range)
--baseline	No	Previous health check for trend comparison

Service Type Routing

{TIPO_PROYECTO}: All project types use the same 10-dimension framework. Dimension weights vary: Agile weights team health higher; Waterfall weights baseline adherence; Portfolio weights strategic alignment.

Before Diagnosing

1. Read the latest status report and EVM data to understand current performance [METRIC]
2. Glob **/risk_register* and **/issue_log* to assess risk and issue posture [PLAN]
3. Read previous health check results (if any) to establish trend baseline [METRIC]
4. Grep for team feedback, retrospective outputs, or morale indicators in project artifacts [INFERENCIA]

Entrada (Input Requirements)

• Current project status data (EVM, velocity, quality metrics)
• Team feedback and morale indicators
• Stakeholder satisfaction data
• Risk register status
• Governance compliance status

Proceso (Protocol)

1. Data collection — Gather quantitative and qualitative data for each dimension
2. Dimension scoring — Rate each dimension as Red (critical), Amber (at risk), or Blue (healthy)
3. Evidence documentation — Document specific evidence supporting each RAG rating
4. Trend analysis — Compare current health with previous assessments
5. Root cause identification — For Red/Amber dimensions, identify root causes
6. Remediation recommendations — Provide specific actions to improve unhealthy dimensions
7. Priority ranking — Rank remediation actions by urgency and impact
8. Scorecard compilation — Build visual scorecard with summary and details
9. Benchmark comparison — Compare health against organizational norms
10. Action plan — Create time-bound action plan for top remediation priorities

Edge Cases

1. First health check with no prior data — Establish baseline ratings with [SUPUESTO] tags on dimensions lacking historical data. Schedule follow-up assessment in 2-4 weeks to validate initial ratings [METRIC].
2. All dimensions rated Blue — Verify this is genuine health, not assessment blindness. Challenge by asking: "What would it take to turn each dimension Red?" Document validation evidence [INFERENCIA].
3. Team refuses to participate in health assessment — This itself is a Red indicator on the Team dimension. Document the refusal and recommend management intervention [STAKEHOLDER].
4. Project in crisis (≥5 Red dimensions) — Shift from health check to triage mode. Prioritize the 2-3 dimensions that, if improved, would cascade improvements to others. Recommend Recovery project type [PLAN].

Example: Good vs Bad

Good example — Actionable health scorecard:

Attribute	Value
Dimensions assessed	All 10 with evidence per dimension
RAG ratings	6 Blue, 3 Amber, 1 Red — each with 2-3 evidence points
Trend	Compared against 2 prior assessments with trajectory arrows
Remediation	5 specific actions ranked by urgency with owners and deadlines
Root causes	Red dimension has fishbone analysis identifying 3 contributing factors
Evidence tags	90% [METRIC]/[PLAN], 10% [INFERENCIA]

Bad example — Superficial health check: All 10 dimensions rated "Blue" with no supporting evidence, no trend analysis, and no remediation actions. A health check without evidence is an opinion, not a diagnosis. Without trend data, point-in-time ratings miss deterioration patterns.

Salida (Deliverables)

• Project health scorecard (RAG per dimension)
• Detailed findings per dimension
• Trend analysis (if prior health checks exist)
• Remediation action plan
• Executive health summary (one-page)

Validation Gate

• All 10 dimensions assessed with ≥2 evidence points each [METRIC]
• Every RAG rating justified with specific data, not subjective impression [PLAN]
• Red/Amber dimensions have root cause analysis with ≥1 identified cause [INFERENCIA]
• Remediation actions are SMART (Specific, Measurable, Assigned, Realistic, Time-bound) [PLAN]
• No dimension rated without data source identified [METRIC]
• Trend analysis included if prior health check exists [METRIC]
• Executive summary fits on one page with RAG visual [PLAN]
• Evidence ratio: ≥80% [METRIC]/[PLAN], <20% [SUPUESTO]
• Priority ranking of remediation actions uses impact-urgency matrix [PLAN]
• Scorecard distinguishes leading indicators from lagging indicators [INFERENCIA]

Escalation Triggers

• 3+ dimensions rated Red
• Health declining for 3+ consecutive periods
• Team health rated Red (attrition/burnout risk)
• Strategic alignment rated Red (project relevance questioned)

Additional Resources

Resource	When to read	Location
Body of Knowledge	Before starting to understand standards and frameworks	references/body-of-knowledge.md
State of the Art	When benchmarking against industry trends	references/state-of-the-art.md
Knowledge Graph	To understand skill dependencies and data flow	references/knowledge-graph.mmd
Use Case Prompts	For specific scenarios and prompt templates	prompts/use-case-prompts.md
Metaprompts	To enhance output quality and reduce bias	prompts/metaprompts.md
Sample Output	Reference for deliverable format and structure	examples/sample-output.md

Output Configuration

• Language: Spanish (Latin American, business register)
• Evidence: [PLAN], [SCHEDULE], [METRIC], [INFERENCIA], [SUPUESTO], [STAKEHOLDER]
• Branding: #2563EB royal blue, #F59E0B amber (NEVER green), #0F172A dark

---

---

Sub-Agents

Dimension Assessor

Dimension Assessor Agent

Core Responsibility

Assesses project health across 8 dimensions with calibrated RAG thresholds. This agent operates autonomously within the project health check domain, applying systematic analysis and producing structured outputs that integrate with the broader project management framework.

Process

1. Gather Inputs. Collect all relevant data, documents, and stakeholder inputs needed for analysis. Validate data quality and completeness before proceeding.
2. Analyze Context. Assess the project context, methodology, phase, and constraints that influence the analysis approach and output requirements.
3. Apply Framework. Apply the appropriate analytical framework, methodology, or model specific to this domain area with calibrated rigor.
4. Generate Findings. Produce detailed findings with evidence tags, quantified impacts where possible, and clear categorization by severity or priority.
5. Validate Results. Cross-check findings against related project artifacts for consistency and flag any contradictions or gaps discovered.
6. Formulate Recommendations. Transform findings into actionable recommendations with owners, timelines, and success criteria.
7. Deliver Output. Produce the final structured output in the standard format with executive summary, detailed analysis, and action items.

Output Format

• Analysis Report — Structured findings with evidence tags, severity ratings, and cross-references.
• Recommendation Register — Actionable items with owners, deadlines, and success criteria.
• Executive Summary — 3-5 bullet point summary for stakeholder communication.

Early Warning Detector

Early Warning Detector Agent

Core Responsibility

Identifies leading indicators of distress: velocity decline, blocker accumulation, stakeholder disengagement. This agent operates autonomously within the project health check domain, applying systematic analysis and producing structured outputs that integrate with the broader project management framework.

Process

1. Gather Inputs. Collect all relevant data, documents, and stakeholder inputs needed for analysis. Validate data quality and completeness before proceeding.
2. Analyze Context. Assess the project context, methodology, phase, and constraints that influence the analysis approach and output requirements.
3. Apply Framework. Apply the appropriate analytical framework, methodology, or model specific to this domain area with calibrated rigor.
4. Generate Findings. Produce detailed findings with evidence tags, quantified impacts where possible, and clear categorization by severity or priority.
5. Validate Results. Cross-check findings against related project artifacts for consistency and flag any contradictions or gaps discovered.
6. Formulate Recommendations. Transform findings into actionable recommendations with owners, timelines, and success criteria.
7. Deliver Output. Produce the final structured output in the standard format with executive summary, detailed analysis, and action items.

Output Format

• Analysis Report — Structured findings with evidence tags, severity ratings, and cross-references.
• Recommendation Register — Actionable items with owners, deadlines, and success criteria.
• Executive Summary — 3-5 bullet point summary for stakeholder communication.

Recovery Recommender

Recovery Recommender Agent

Core Responsibility

Recommends recovery actions when health check reveals Yellow/Red dimensions. This agent operates autonomously within the project health check domain, applying systematic analysis and producing structured outputs that integrate with the broader project management framework.

Process

1. Gather Inputs. Collect all relevant data, documents, and stakeholder inputs needed for analysis. Validate data quality and completeness before proceeding.
2. Analyze Context. Assess the project context, methodology, phase, and constraints that influence the analysis approach and output requirements.
3. Apply Framework. Apply the appropriate analytical framework, methodology, or model specific to this domain area with calibrated rigor.
4. Generate Findings. Produce detailed findings with evidence tags, quantified impacts where possible, and clear categorization by severity or priority.
5. Validate Results. Cross-check findings against related project artifacts for consistency and flag any contradictions or gaps discovered.
6. Formulate Recommendations. Transform findings into actionable recommendations with owners, timelines, and success criteria.
7. Deliver Output. Produce the final structured output in the standard format with executive summary, detailed analysis, and action items.

Output Format

• Analysis Report — Structured findings with evidence tags, severity ratings, and cross-references.
• Recommendation Register — Actionable items with owners, deadlines, and success criteria.
• Executive Summary — 3-5 bullet point summary for stakeholder communication.

Trend Correlator

Trend Correlator Agent

Core Responsibility

Correlates trends across dimensions: schedule pressure degrades quality, burnout increases risk. This agent operates autonomously within the project health check domain, applying systematic analysis and producing structured outputs that integrate with the broader project management framework.

Process

1. Gather Inputs. Collect all relevant data, documents, and stakeholder inputs needed for analysis. Validate data quality and completeness before proceeding.
2. Analyze Context. Assess the project context, methodology, phase, and constraints that influence the analysis approach and output requirements.
3. Apply Framework. Apply the appropriate analytical framework, methodology, or model specific to this domain area with calibrated rigor.
4. Generate Findings. Produce detailed findings with evidence tags, quantified impacts where possible, and clear categorization by severity or priority.
5. Validate Results. Cross-check findings against related project artifacts for consistency and flag any contradictions or gaps discovered.
6. Formulate Recommendations. Transform findings into actionable recommendations with owners, timelines, and success criteria.
7. Deliver Output. Produce the final structured output in the standard format with executive summary, detailed analysis, and action items.

Output Format

• Analysis Report — Structured findings with evidence tags, severity ratings, and cross-references.
• Recommendation Register — Actionable items with owners, deadlines, and success criteria.
• Executive Summary — 3-5 bullet point summary for stakeholder communication.