Claude-skill-registry dialogue-assess-phase

Assess readiness to transition between SDLC phases. Aggregates component assessments and generates PROCEED/PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION/DEFER recommendation. Triggers on "assess phase", "phase readiness", "ready to proceed", "phase transition check", "can we move to phase".

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/dialogue-assess-phase" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-dialogue-assess-phase && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/data/dialogue-assess-phase/SKILL.md
source content

Dialogue: Phase Readiness Assessment

Assess readiness to transition from one SDLC phase to the next. This composite assessment aggregates component assessments and evaluates overall readiness, generating a recommendation that requires human approval.

Framework Grounding

This skill operationalises:

  • Phase transitions: 35-55% information loss at transitions requires explicit checkpoints
  • Theory-building: Validates sufficient understanding exists before proceeding
  • STS joint optimisation: Human approval ensures both technical and social readiness

When to Use

Use this skill at phase transition points:

  • Phase 1 (Initiation/Conception) → Phase 2 (Planning)
  • Phase 2 (Planning) → Phase 3 (Analysis/Requirements)
  • Phase 3 (Analysis/Requirements) → Phase 4 (Design/Architecture)
  • And so on through Phase 7 (Deployment/Operations)

Phase Readiness Dimensions

The assessment evaluates four readiness dimensions:

DimensionWhat It MeasuresKey Inputs
documentation_readiness
Are phase artefacts complete?Required documents exist
knowledge_transfer_readiness
Is knowledge documented/shared?Theory captured, decisions logged
stakeholder_readiness
Are stakeholders aligned?Alignment assessment, approvals
technical_readiness
Are technical prerequisites met?Tests pass, dependencies resolved

Recommendation Outcomes

RecommendationMeaningAction
PROCEED
All dimensions satisfactoryHuman approves, transition proceeds
PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION
Minor gaps identifiedHuman reviews gaps, may proceed with mitigations
DEFER
Significant gaps presentAddress blockers before transitioning

How to Assess Phase Readiness

Step 1: Gather Context

First, gather information about the current state:

# Check for recent problem framing assessment
ls -la ${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR}/.dialogue/logs/assessments/ASSESS-*.yaml | tail -5

# Check for recent daily checks
grep -l "assessment_type: DAILY_CHECK" ${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR}/.dialogue/logs/assessments/*.yaml | tail -5

# Check decision log activity
ls -la ${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR}/.dialogue/logs/decisions/ | tail -10

Step 2: Interactive Assessment

Ask the user to evaluate each dimension using AskUserQuestion:

  1. Documentation readiness (1-5): Are required phase artefacts complete?
  2. Knowledge transfer readiness (1-5): Is knowledge documented and shared?
  3. Stakeholder readiness (1-5): Are stakeholders aligned on proceeding?
  4. Technical readiness (1-5): Are technical prerequisites met?

Then ask: 5. What is the current phase? (1-7) 6. What is the target phase? (2-7) 7. Are there any blockers? (optional free text) 8. Are there any risks to proceeding? (optional free text)

Step 3: Reference Component Assessments

If available, reference recent component assessments:

  • Problem framing assessment ID (if exists)
  • Stakeholder alignment assessment ID (if exists, from FW-041)
  • TTKM assessment ID (if exists, from FW-041)
  • Recent daily check IDs

Step 4: Log the Assessment

${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/dialogue-assess-phase/scripts/log-assess-phase.sh \
  <assessor> \
  <current_phase> <target_phase> \
  <documentation_readiness> <knowledge_transfer_readiness> \
  <stakeholder_readiness> <technical_readiness> \
  [problem_framing_ref] [blockers] [risks]

Parameters

ParameterValuesDescription
assessor
ai:claude
or
human:<id>
Who performed the assessment
current_phase
1-7
Current SDLC phase
target_phase
2-7
Target phase (must be > current)
documentation_readiness
1-5
Documentation completeness
knowledge_transfer_readiness
1-5
Knowledge sharing quality
stakeholder_readiness
1-5
Stakeholder alignment
technical_readiness
1-5
Technical prerequisites
problem_framing_ref
string (optional)ASSESS-... ID of framing assessment
blockers
string (optional)Blocking issues (comma-separated)
risks
string (optional)Identified risks (comma-separated)
context
string (optional)Situational context
tags
string (optional)Comma-separated categorisation tags

Recommendation Logic

The script computes a recommendation based on dimension scores:

Average score = (doc + knowledge + stakeholder + technical) / 4

If average >= 4.0 AND no blockers AND problem_framing exists:
  → PROCEED
Else if average >= 3.0 AND blockers are manageable:
  → PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION
Else:
  → DEFER

Special conditions:

  • Missing problem framing assessment: Maximum recommendation is PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION
  • Any dimension score of 1: Forces DEFER
  • Blockers present: Maximum recommendation is PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION

DEFER Remediation Guidance

When the recommendation is DEFER, the assessment includes a

defer_guidance
block that provides actionable remediation advice based on two factors:

Factor 1: Phase Tacit Percentage

The current phase's information composition determines remediation character:

PhaseTacit %Remediation Character
1. Initiation75%Primarily dialogue-based
2. Planning55%Dialogue-dominant
3. Requirements50%Balanced
4. Design40%Balanced, slightly artifact-weighted
5. Implementation35%Artifact-dominant
6-7. Testing/Ops30%Primarily artifact/process

Factor 2: Gap Dimension

The lowest-scoring dimension identifies what type of gap to address:

GapMeaningNatural Remediation
documentation
Artifacts incompleteReview/create documents
knowledge
Tacit understanding not sharedDialogue, pairing, mentoring
stakeholder
Alignment issuesFacilitation, workshops
technical
Blockers, dependenciesTechnical resolution

Recommended Approach

The combination produces a

recommended_approach
:

  • DIALOGUE: High-tacit phase or knowledge/stakeholder gaps → convene sessions, elicit understanding
  • MIXED: Medium-tacit phase or mixed gaps → balance dialogue with artifact work
  • ARTIFACT: Low-tacit phase with documentation/technical gaps → focus on specifications, resolution

Example DEFER Output

defer_guidance:
  primary_gap: knowledge
  primary_gap_score: 2
  secondary_gaps: []
  phase_tacit_percentage: 75
  recommended_approach: DIALOGUE
  specific_actions:
    - "Conduct knowledge transfer sessions with domain experts"
    - "Pair with experienced team members"
    - "Facilitate stakeholder interviews to capture tacit understanding"
  restart_point:
    phase: 1
    phase_name: "Initiation/Conception"
    focus: "Address knowledge gaps before re-assessing"

Human Approval Workflow

Phase transitions require human approval:

  1. AI presents assessment summary with recommendation
  2. Human reviews:
    • Component assessment references
    • Dimension scores and rationale
    • Identified blockers and risks
  3. Human decides: approve, approve with conditions, or defer
  4. Decision is logged with approval metadata

Example Approval Flow

AI: Phase readiness assessment complete.

    Current Phase: 1 (Problem Definition)
    Target Phase:  2 (Requirements)

    Dimension Scores:
    - Documentation:       4/5 (requirements doc drafted)
    - Knowledge Transfer:  4/5 (decisions logged, theory captured)
    - Stakeholder:         3/5 (one stakeholder pending review)
    - Technical:           5/5 (no blockers)

    Component Assessments:
    - Problem Framing: ASSESS-20260122-140000 (5/6, confidence 4)

    Blockers: None
    Risks: Stakeholder review may surface new requirements

    Recommendation: PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION

    Do you approve proceeding to Phase 2?
    [Options: Approve / Approve with conditions / Defer]

User: Approve with conditions - complete stakeholder review within 48 hours

AI: Approved with conditions. Logging the decision...
    [Logs DEC-... with approval and conditions]

    Phase transition approved. Moving to Phase 2 (Planning).
    Condition: Complete stakeholder review within 48 hours.

Output

The script returns the generated assessment ID (e.g.,

ASSESS-20260122-150000
).

The assessment is stored in

.dialogue/logs/assessments/
and creates:

  • Assessment YAML file with full readiness data
  • Context graph node (ARTIFACT with artifact_type: ASSESSMENT)
  • CREATED edge from assessor to assessment
  • ASSESSES edges to referenced component assessments

Example Direct Invocation

${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/dialogue-assess-phase/scripts/log-assess-phase.sh \
  "human:pidster" \
  1 2 \
  4 4 3 5 \
  "ASSESS-20260122-140000" \
  "" \
  "Stakeholder review may surface new requirements"

Phase-Specific Considerations

Phase 1 → 2 (Initiation/Conception → Planning)

Critical inputs:

  • Problem framing assessment (strongly encouraged)
  • Stakeholder alignment on business case
  • Strategic rationale documented

Phase 2 → 3 (Planning → Analysis/Requirements)

Critical inputs:

  • Project plan and resource allocations
  • Risk register established
  • Governance structure defined

Phase 3 → 4 (Analysis/Requirements → Design/Architecture)

Critical inputs:

  • Requirements documented and reviewed
  • Stakeholders approved requirements
  • Key technical constraints identified

Phase 4 → 5 (Design/Architecture → Implementation/Construction)

Critical inputs:

  • Architecture decisions documented (ADRs)
  • Technical feasibility validated
  • Performance/scalability requirements addressed

Later Phases

Similar patterns—each transition validates that:

  1. Phase artefacts are complete
  2. Knowledge is captured and shared
  3. Stakeholders are aligned
  4. Technical prerequisites are met

Schema Reference

See Assessment Schema for the complete PHASE_READINESS response schema and validation rules.