feat: Community Leaderboard for AgentReady Scores

[jeremyeder]

Summary

Implements a community-driven leaderboard where users can submit their AgentReady assessment results via CLI. Submissions are validated through GitHub Actions and displayed on the existing GitHub Pages site.

Features

✅ Self-Service Submission: agentready submit command creates PR automatically
✅ Anti-Gaming Validation: Ownership verification + re-assessment
✅ Multiple Views: Overall, by-language, by-size, most-improved
✅ Historical Tracking: Multiple submissions per repo show improvement over time
✅ Integrated with Docs: Leaderboard pages added to existing Jekyll site

Components

1. CLI Submit Command (src/agentready/cli/submit.py)

   • Uses PyGithub to create PR automatically
   • Verifies user has commit access to submitted repo
   • Generates unique timestamp-based filenames

2. Validation Workflow (.github/workflows/validate-leaderboard-submission.yml)

   • Re-runs assessment on submitted repository
   • Compares claimed vs actual score (±2 point tolerance)
   • Checks repository is public and submitter has access
   • Comments on PR with validation results

3. Aggregation Script (scripts/generate-leaderboard-data.py)

   • Scans submissions/ directory
   • Generates docs/_data/leaderboard.json
   • Calculates rankings by score, language, size
   • Identifies "most improved" repositories

4. Leaderboard Pages (docs/leaderboard/)

   • Main leaderboard with top 10 cards + full table
   • By-language rankings
   • Most-improved tracking
   • Tier-based color coding (Platinum/Gold/Silver/Bronze)

Implementation Plan

See complete specification: specs/leaderboard-feature-spec.md

Phase 1: CLI Submit Command (foundation)
Phase 2: Validation Workflow (anti-gaming)
Phase 3: Aggregation Script (data pipeline)
Phase 4: Leaderboard Pages (UI)

Example Usage

# Developer workflow
cd ~/my-awesome-project

# 1. Run assessment
agentready assess .

# 2. Submit to leaderboard
export GITHUB_TOKEN=ghp_xxxxx
agentready submit

# 3. Wait for validation → merge → leaderboard updates

Design Decisions

• ISO 8601 Timestamps: 2025-12-03T14-30-45-assessment.json (unique, sortable)
• Submission Path: submissions/{org}/{repo}/{timestamp}-assessment.json
• Score Tolerance: ±2 points (accounts for minor variations)
• Rate Limiting: 1 submission per repo per 24 hours
• Static Site Generation: Leverages existing Jekyll/GitHub Pages

Security & Anti-Gaming

• Ownership verification (submitter must have commit access)
• Re-assessment on validation (never trust submitted scores)
• Public repo requirement (transparent)
• Sandboxed assessment runs (isolated /tmp directory)
• Rate limiting per repository

Future Enhancements (Out of Scope)

• Badges for README ([![AgentReady Score](https://img.shields.io/badge/...)](...))
• API endpoint for programmatic access
• Historical charts (score trends over time)
• Filters/search on leaderboard UI

---

Ready for Review: The spec is complete and implementation-ready. This PR will be updated with actual implementation commits following the 4-phase plan.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: c443dea5
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 9:44 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 137 files
• Markdown: 99 files
• YAML: 21 files
• JSON: 9 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 317
• Total Lines: 175,959

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 449/1369
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	55

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 137 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.5% of 137 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: c443dea
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

⚠️ Broken links found in documentation. See workflow logs for details.

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: e2505626
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 9:53 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,255

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: e250562
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

⚠️ Broken links found in documentation. See workflow logs for details.

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: 5f5d218a
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 9:56 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,282

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: 5f5d218
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: ea9d4504
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 9:58 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,285

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: ea9d450
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: 4791b200
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 9:59 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,291

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: 4791b20
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: 9342896d
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 10:05 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.4s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,346

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• Tool Version: AgentReady v1.0.0
• Research Report: Bundled version
• Repository Snapshot: 9342896
• Assessment Duration: 1.4s

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: 1a4db542
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 10:07 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.7s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,351

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1184 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• AgentReady Version: v2.8.1
• Research Version: v1.0.0
• Repository Snapshot: 1a4db54
• Assessment Duration: 1.7s
• Assessed By: runner@runnervmoqczp
• Assessment Date: December 03, 2025 at 10:07 PM

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🤖 AgentReady Assessment Report

Repository: agentready
Path: /home/runner/work/agentready/agentready
Branch: HEAD | Commit: 364b5e2c
Assessed: December 03, 2025 at 10:18 PM
AgentReady Version: 2.8.1
Run by: runner@runnervmoqczp

---

📊 Summary

Metric	Value
Overall Score	80.9/100
Certification Level	Gold
Attributes Assessed	20/30
Attributes Not Assessed	10
Assessment Duration	1.3s

Languages Detected

• Python: 139 files
• Markdown: 103 files
• YAML: 23 files
• JSON: 10 files
• Shell: 6 files

Repository Stats

• Total Files: 328
• Total Lines: 178,372

🎖️ Certification Ladder

• 💎 Platinum (90-100)
• 🥇 Gold (75-89) → YOUR LEVEL ←
• 🥈 Silver (60-74)
• 🥉 Bronze (40-59)
• ⚠️ Needs Improvement (0-39)

📋 Detailed Findings

API Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
OpenAPI/Swagger Specifications	T3	⊘ not_applicable	—

Build & Development

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
One-Command Build/Setup	T2	✅ pass	100
Container/Virtualization Setup	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Code Organization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Separation of Concerns	T2	✅ pass	98

Code Quality

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Type Annotations	T1	❌ fail	41
Cyclomatic Complexity Thresholds	T3	✅ pass	100
Semantic Naming	T3	✅ pass	100
Structured Logging	T3	❌ fail	0
Code Smell Elimination	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

❌ Type Annotations

Measured: 32.8% (Threshold: ≥80%)

Evidence:

• Typed functions: 451/1373
• Coverage: 32.8%

📝 Remediation Steps

Add type annotations to function signatures

1. For Python: Add type hints to function parameters and return types
2. For TypeScript: Enable strict mode in tsconfig.json
3. Use mypy or pyright for Python type checking
4. Use tsc --strict for TypeScript
5. Add type annotations gradually to existing code

Commands:

# Python
pip install mypy
mypy --strict src/

# TypeScript
npm install --save-dev typescript
echo '{"compilerOptions": {"strict": true}}' > tsconfig.json

Examples:

# Python - Before
def calculate(x, y):
    return x + y

# Python - After
def calculate(x: float, y: float) -> float:
    return x + y

// TypeScript - tsconfig.json
{
  "compilerOptions": {
    "strict": true,
    "noImplicitAny": true,
    "strictNullChecks": true
  }
}

❌ Structured Logging

Measured: not configured (Threshold: structured logging library)

Evidence:

• No structured logging library found
• Checked files: pyproject.toml
• Using built-in logging module (unstructured)

📝 Remediation Steps

Add structured logging library for machine-parseable logs

1. Choose structured logging library (structlog for Python, winston for Node.js)
2. Install library and configure JSON formatter
3. Add standard fields: timestamp, level, message, context
4. Include request context: request_id, user_id, session_id
5. Use consistent field naming (snake_case for Python)
6. Never log sensitive data (passwords, tokens, PII)
7. Configure different formats for dev (pretty) and prod (JSON)

Commands:

# Install structlog
pip install structlog

# Configure structlog
# See examples for configuration

Examples:

# Python with structlog
import structlog

# Configure structlog
structlog.configure(
    processors=[
        structlog.stdlib.add_log_level,
        structlog.processors.TimeStamper(fmt="iso"),
        structlog.processors.JSONRenderer()
    ]
)

logger = structlog.get_logger()

# Good: Structured logging
logger.info(
    "user_login",
    user_id="123",
    email="user@example.com",
    ip_address="192.168.1.1"
)

# Bad: Unstructured logging
logger.info(f"User {user_id} logged in from {ip}")

Context Window Optimization

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
CLAUDE.md Configuration Files	T1	✅ pass	100
File Size Limits	T2	❌ fail	56

❌ File Size Limits

Measured: 2 huge, 8 large out of 139 (Threshold: <5% files >500 lines, 0 files >1000 lines)

Evidence:

• Found 2 files >1000 lines (1.4% of 139 files)
• Largest: tests/unit/test_models.py (1192 lines)

📝 Remediation Steps

Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules

1. Identify files >1000 lines
2. Split into logical submodules
3. Extract classes/functions into separate files
4. Maintain single responsibility principle

Examples:

# Split large file:
# models.py (1500 lines) → models/user.py, models/product.py, models/order.py

Dependency Management

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Lock Files for Reproducibility	T1	✅ pass	100
Dependency Freshness & Security	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Documentation

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Concise Documentation	T2	❌ fail	70
Inline Documentation	T2	✅ pass	100

❌ Concise Documentation

Measured: 276 lines, 40 headings, 38 bullets (Threshold: <500 lines, structured format)

Evidence:

• README length: 276 lines (excellent)
• Heading density: 14.5 per 100 lines (target: 3-5)
• 1 paragraphs exceed 10 lines (walls of text)

📝 Remediation Steps

Make documentation more concise and structured

1. Break long README into multiple documents (docs/ directory)
2. Add clear Markdown headings (##, ###) for structure
3. Convert prose paragraphs to bullet points where possible
4. Add table of contents for documents >100 lines
5. Use code blocks instead of describing commands in prose
6. Move detailed content to wiki or docs/, keep README focused

Commands:

# Check README length
wc -l README.md

# Count headings
grep -c '^#' README.md

Examples:

# Good: Concise with structure

## Quick Start
```bash
pip install -e .
agentready assess .

Features

• Fast repository scanning
• HTML and Markdown reports
• 25 agent-ready attributes

Documentation

See docs/ for detailed guides.

Bad: Verbose prose

This project is a tool that helps you assess your repository
against best practices for AI-assisted development. It works by
scanning your codebase and checking for various attributes that
make repositories more effective when working with AI coding
assistants like Claude Code...

[Many more paragraphs of prose...]

</details>

### Documentation Standards

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| README Structure | T1 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) | T3 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| Architecture Decision Records | T3 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Architecture Decision Records (ADRs)

**Measured**: no ADR directory (Threshold: ADR directory with decisions)

**Evidence**:
- No ADR directory found (checked docs/adr/, .adr/, adr/, docs/decisions/)

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

1. Create docs/adr/ directory in repository root
2. Use Michael Nygard ADR template or MADR format
3. Document each significant architectural decision
4. Number ADRs sequentially (0001-*.md, 0002-*.md)
5. Include Status, Context, Decision, and Consequences sections
6. Update ADR status when decisions are revised (Superseded, Deprecated)

**Commands**:

```bash
# Create ADR directory
mkdir -p docs/adr

# Create first ADR using template
cat > docs/adr/0001-use-architecture-decision-records.md << 'EOF'
# 1. Use Architecture Decision Records

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need to record architectural decisions made in this project.

## Decision
We will use Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) as described by Michael Nygard.

## Consequences
- Decisions are documented with context
- Future contributors understand rationale
- ADRs are lightweight and version-controlled
EOF

Examples:

# Example ADR Structure

```markdown
# 2. Use PostgreSQL for Database

Date: 2025-11-22

## Status
Accepted

## Context
We need a relational database for complex queries and ACID transactions.
Team has PostgreSQL experience. Need full-text search capabilities.

## Decision
Use PostgreSQL 15+ as primary database.

## Consequences
- Positive: Robust ACID, full-text search, team familiarity
- Negative: Higher resource usage than SQLite
- Neutral: Need to manage migrations, backups

</details>

### Git & Version Control

| Attribute | Tier | Status | Score |
|-----------|------|--------|-------|
| Conventional Commit Messages | T2 | ❌ fail | 0 |
| .gitignore Completeness | T2 | ✅ pass | 100 |
| Branch Protection Rules | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |
| Issue & Pull Request Templates | T4 | ⊘ not_applicable | — |

#### ❌ Conventional Commit Messages

**Measured**: not configured (Threshold: configured)

**Evidence**:
- No commitlint or husky configuration

<details><summary><strong>📝 Remediation Steps</strong></summary>


Configure conventional commits with commitlint

1. Install commitlint
2. Configure husky for commit-msg hook

**Commands**:

```bash
npm install --save-dev @commitlint/cli @commitlint/config-conventional husky

Performance

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Performance Benchmarks	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Repository Structure

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Standard Project Layouts	T1	✅ pass	100
Issue & Pull Request Templates	T3	✅ pass	100
Separation of Concerns	T2	⊘ not_applicable	—

Security

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Security Scanning Automation	T4	⊘ not_applicable	—

Testing & CI/CD

Attribute	Tier	Status	Score
Test Coverage Requirements	T2	✅ pass	100
Pre-commit Hooks & CI/CD Linting	T2	✅ pass	100
CI/CD Pipeline Visibility	T3	✅ pass	80

🎯 Next Steps

Priority Improvements (highest impact first):

1. Type Annotations (Tier 1) - +10.0 points potential
   • Add type annotations to function signatures
2. Conventional Commit Messages (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Configure conventional commits with commitlint
3. File Size Limits (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Refactor large files into smaller, focused modules
4. Concise Documentation (Tier 2) - +3.0 points potential
   • Make documentation more concise and structured
5. Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) (Tier 3) - +1.5 points potential
   • Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) directory and document key decisions

---

📝 Assessment Metadata

• AgentReady Version: v2.8.1
• Research Version: v1.0.0
• Repository Snapshot: 364b5e2
• Assessment Duration: 1.3s
• Assessed By: runner@runnervmoqczp
• Assessment Date: December 03, 2025 at 10:18 PM

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.9.0 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀