From pro-workflow
Rates code options by Thoroughness (1-10), estimates AI-assisted times, recommends thorough approaches, and checks for contained vs unbounded scopes.
npx claudepluginhub rohitg00/pro-workflow --plugin pro-workflowThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
AI drops the cost of doing things right to near-zero. Stop picking the quick hack when the thorough option takes the same wall-clock time with AI assistance.
Assesses code, designs, or approaches with 0-10 rating, pros/cons analysis, and actionable recommendations. Use for evaluating quality or trade-offs.
Handles decision-making tasks in Claude Code. Auto-activates on 'decision.md' matches or via direct /Decision invocation for evaluating code options and trade-offs.
Builds weighted decision matrices, analyzes trade-offs, and generates ADRs for architectural, technical, and process decisions like database selection or framework choice.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
AI drops the cost of doing things right to near-zero. Stop picking the quick hack when the thorough option takes the same wall-clock time with AI assistance.
Every option gets a Thoroughness score (T:X/10):
| Score | What It Means |
|---|---|
| T:10 | All edge cases handled, full test coverage, docs updated, error messages helpful |
| T:9 | Edge cases covered, tests pass, types solid, no shortcuts |
| T:8 | Happy path + error paths, good tests, clean types |
| T:7 | Happy path works, basic tests, no docs |
| T:5 | Works for the demo, fragile, manual testing only |
| T:3 | Quick hack, no tests, tech debt accruing |
| T:1 | Copy-paste from Stack Overflow, untested, hope it works |
When presenting choices, follow this format every time:
The user may have been away. Start with orientation:
PROJECT: my-app (branch: feat/rate-limiting)
TASK: Add rate limiting to the /api/upload endpoint
Option A — Full rate limiter with sliding window (T:9/10)
Manual estimate: 3-4 hours
AI-assisted estimate: 15-20 minutes
Covers: per-user limits, sliding window, Redis-backed, retry-after headers,
429 responses, rate limit bypass for admin, tests for all paths
Option B — Basic in-memory counter (T:4/10)
Manual estimate: 30 minutes
AI-assisted estimate: 5 minutes
Covers: global counter, fixed window, resets on restart, no persistence,
no per-user tracking, no tests
Delta: Option A adds per-user tracking, persistence across restarts,
proper HTTP headers, and admin bypass. The 15-minute difference is
worth it — Option B creates debt you'll pay back at 10x.
Always recommend the higher-thoroughness option. State the delta — what the user gains for the additional time.
If the lower option is genuinely appropriate (prototype, throwaway script, time-boxed spike), say so explicitly with reasoning.
Before scoring, classify the scope:
Work with a clear boundary. You can be thorough because the surface area is finite.
These are T:9-10 opportunities. Take them.
Work without a clear boundary. Being thorough here means boiling the ocean.
Flag these immediately. Break them into contained pieces:
SCOPE CHECK: "Refactor all error handling" is unbounded.
Contained breakdown:
1. Audit current error patterns (T:8, ~10 min)
2. Define error handling standard (T:9, ~15 min)
3. Refactor src/api/auth.ts errors (T:10, ~10 min)
4. Refactor src/api/upload.ts errors (T:10, ~10 min)
5. Refactor src/api/billing.ts errors (T:10, ~10 min)
...
N. Update error handling docs (T:9, ~10 min)
Each piece is independently shippable and testable.
Is the scope contained?
YES → Score it. Recommend T:8+ option.
NO → Break it into contained pieces. Score each piece.
Is the T:8+ option significantly more effort with AI?
NO → Always pick it. The marginal cost is near-zero.
YES → Explain why. It's rare, but prototypes and spikes exist.
Is the user asking for a quick hack explicitly?
YES → Acknowledge, deliver it, but note what T:8+ would look like.
NO → Default to thoroughness.
Say "skipping thoroughness scoring — this is a spike/one-off" so the user knows it was a conscious choice.
## Thoroughness Scoring
Score every option T:1-10. Recommend T:8+ unless it's a spike.
Show effort delta: manual estimate vs AI-assisted estimate.
Scope check first — contained (do it) vs unbounded (break it down).
Re-state project, branch, and task before presenting options.