tech-stack-evaluator

$npx mdskill add alirezarezvani/claude-skills/tech-stack-evaluator

Evaluates and compares technology stacks with TCO, security, and ecosystem analysis

  • Compares frameworks, stacks, and cloud providers with weighted scoring
  • Uses GitHub, npm, and pricing data for analysis
  • Prioritizes based on user-defined criteria like cost, security, and adoption
  • Delivers structured JSON with actionable insights and recommendations

SKILL.md

.github/skills/tech-stack-evaluatorView on GitHub ↗
---
name: "tech-stack-evaluator"
description: Technology stack evaluation and comparison with TCO analysis, security assessment, and ecosystem health scoring. Use when comparing frameworks, evaluating technology stacks, calculating total cost of ownership, assessing migration paths, or analyzing ecosystem viability.
---

# Technology Stack Evaluator

Evaluate and compare technologies, frameworks, and cloud providers with data-driven analysis and actionable recommendations.

## Table of Contents

- [Capabilities](#capabilities)
- [Quick Start](#quick-start)
- [Input Formats](#input-formats)
- [Analysis Types](#analysis-types)
- [Scripts](#scripts)
- [References](#references)

---

## Capabilities

| Capability | Description |
|------------|-------------|
| Technology Comparison | Compare frameworks and libraries with weighted scoring |
| TCO Analysis | Calculate 5-year total cost including hidden costs |
| Ecosystem Health | Assess GitHub metrics, npm adoption, community strength |
| Security Assessment | Evaluate vulnerabilities and compliance readiness |
| Migration Analysis | Estimate effort, risks, and timeline for migrations |
| Cloud Comparison | Compare AWS, Azure, GCP for specific workloads |

---

## Quick Start

### Compare Two Technologies

```
Compare React vs Vue for a SaaS dashboard.
Priorities: developer productivity (40%), ecosystem (30%), performance (30%).
```

### Calculate TCO

```
Calculate 5-year TCO for Next.js on Vercel.
Team: 8 developers. Hosting: $2500/month. Growth: 40%/year.
```

### Assess Migration

```
Evaluate migrating from Angular.js to React.
Codebase: 50,000 lines, 200 components. Team: 6 developers.
```

---

## Input Formats

The evaluator accepts three input formats:

**Text** - Natural language queries
```
Compare PostgreSQL vs MongoDB for our e-commerce platform.
```

**YAML** - Structured input for automation
```yaml
comparison:
  technologies: ["React", "Vue"]
  use_case: "SaaS dashboard"
  weights:
    ecosystem: 30
    performance: 25
    developer_experience: 45
```

**JSON** - Programmatic integration
```json
{
  "technologies": ["React", "Vue"],
  "use_case": "SaaS dashboard"
}
```

---

## Analysis Types

### Quick Comparison (200-300 tokens)
- Weighted scores and recommendation
- Top 3 decision factors
- Confidence level

### Standard Analysis (500-800 tokens)
- Comparison matrix
- TCO overview
- Security summary

### Full Report (1200-1500 tokens)
- All metrics and calculations
- Migration analysis
- Detailed recommendations

---

## Scripts

### stack_comparator.py

Compare technologies with customizable weighted criteria.

```bash
python scripts/stack_comparator.py --help
```

### tco_calculator.py

Calculate total cost of ownership over multi-year projections.

```bash
python scripts/tco_calculator.py --input assets/sample_input_tco.json
```

### ecosystem_analyzer.py

Analyze ecosystem health from GitHub, npm, and community metrics.

```bash
python scripts/ecosystem_analyzer.py --technology react
```

### security_assessor.py

Evaluate security posture and compliance readiness.

```bash
python scripts/security_assessor.py --technology express --compliance soc2,gdpr
```

### migration_analyzer.py

Estimate migration complexity, effort, and risks.

```bash
python scripts/migration_analyzer.py --from angular-1.x --to react
```

---

## References

| Document | Content |
|----------|---------|
| `references/metrics.md` | Detailed scoring algorithms and calculation formulas |
| `references/examples.md` | Input/output examples for all analysis types |
| `references/workflows.md` | Step-by-step evaluation workflows |

---

## Confidence Levels

| Level | Score | Interpretation |
|-------|-------|----------------|
| High | 80-100% | Clear winner, strong data |
| Medium | 50-79% | Trade-offs present, moderate uncertainty |
| Low | < 50% | Close call, limited data |

---

## When to Use

- Comparing frontend/backend frameworks for new projects
- Evaluating cloud providers for specific workloads
- Planning technology migrations with risk assessment
- Calculating build vs. buy decisions with TCO
- Assessing open-source library viability

## When NOT to Use

- Trivial decisions between similar tools (use team preference)
- Mandated technology choices (decision already made)
- Emergency production issues (use monitoring tools)

More from alirezarezvani/claude-skills

SkillDescription
a11y-auditAccessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.
ab-test-setupWhen the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
ad-creativeWhen the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.
adversarial-reviewerAdversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
aeoAnswer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.
agent-decision-receiptsMint a tamper-evident, post-quantum-signed receipt for a consequential agent action (deploy, delete, pay, grant-access, model decision) so it can be verified later from the certificate alone. Use when an autonomous agent takes a side-effecting action that may need to be proven later, or when satisfying EU AI Act Article 12 record-keeping. Three decisions: whether an action needs a receipt, minting it, verifying it. Signing is delegated to the open-source OpenAgentOntology package. Not after-the-fact log analysis; not a hosted notary; not a legal opinion.
agent-designerUse when the user asks to design a multi-agent system, pick an orchestration pattern (supervisor/swarm/pipeline), generate tool schemas for agents, or evaluate agent execution logs for cost, latency, and failure bottlenecks. Examples: 'design an agent architecture for research automation', 'generate Anthropic tool schemas from these tool descriptions', 'analyze these agent run logs for bottlenecks'. NOT for Claude Code workflow files (use workflow-builder) or single-agent prompt design (use agent-workflow-designer).
agent-harnessTurn any domain folder of skills into a bounded agentic loop: compile a goal into a verifiable task plan, execute tasks with the domain's own tools, verify every task with machine-run checks, retry with caps, escalate to a human when budgets exhaust, and refuse to close until everything is verified or explicitly waived. Use when you want an agent or subagent to pick up a goal and drive it to a verified close across one of this repo's 18 domains ('run this goal through the engineering harness', 'set up an agentic loop for marketing work', 'make the finance domain self-verifying'). NOT for authoring Claude Code Workflow-tool .js scripts (workflow-builder), N-agent tournaments on one task (agenthub), single-file metric optimization (autoresearch-agent), or discovering published loop recipes (loop-library).
agent-launcher-orchestratorUse when a user wants to build, launch, grade, or schedule a Claude Managed Agent (CMA) in their own Anthropic account — "build me an agent", "launch this as a managed agent", "run this on a schedule", "grade my agent against a rubric", "set up a nightly worker". Reads the per-session goal (./my-agent/goal.json), routes deterministically to one of five phase sub-skills (interview → stage-launch → grade-iterate → run-without-you → wrap-up) via goal_router.py, and compiles the goal+phase into an execution shape (single-pass workflow / bounded grade→iterate loop / recurring cron deployment loop) via loop_compiler.py. Forks context so heavy intake (build sheets, payloads, eval cases) stays out of the parent thread. All launches are emitted as BYOK curl the user runs with their own key; no tool makes API calls. Inspired by anthropics/launch-your-agent (Apache-2.0). Distinct from engineering/agent-harness (generic domain loop) and engineering/write-a-skill (authors Claude Code skills, not CMAs).
agent-memoryUse when a project's CLAUDE.md has grown past what anyone reads and you want the agent to learn durable facts from its own sessions instead — or when asking why the agent keeps re-learning the same correction, why a remembered rule is wrong, or where a memory line came from. Implements a four-tier store (L0 transcripts / L1 candidates / L2 project context / L3 stable persona) where promotion is earned by recurrence across sessions and days, never by one confident statement, and nothing reaches a committed file without a human adopting it.