cto-advisor
Technical leadership guidance for engineering teams, architecture decisions, and technology strategy. Use when assessing technical debt, scaling engineering teams, evaluating technologies, making architecture decisions, establishing engineering metrics, or when user mentions CTO, tech debt, technical debt, team scaling, architecture decisions, technology evaluation, engineering metrics, DORA metrics, or technology strategy.
91
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
92%
1.43xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Evaluation results
82%
40%Technical Debt Assessment for RapidCart Platform
Technical debt assessment and remediation planning
Uses analyzer script
25%
100%
Critical capacity: 40%
0%
0%
High capacity: 25%
0%
100%
Medium capacity: 15%
0%
100%
Low debt: ongoing
0%
40%
Debt score in report
80%
100%
Category breakdown
100%
100%
Prioritized actions
100%
100%
Strategic recommendations
100%
100%
Risk assessment present
60%
100%
100%
31%Database Selection for Microservices Migration
Technology evaluation and ADR documentation
ADR file path
40%
100%
ADR status field
100%
100%
Context and problem
100%
100%
All 3 options included
100%
100%
Pros and cons per option
100%
100%
Decision rationale
100%
100%
Consequences documented
100%
100%
Technical criteria: 40% weight
0%
100%
Business criteria: 30% weight
100%
100%
Operational criteria: 30% weight
0%
100%
Decision drivers listed
100%
100%
100%
39%Engineering Scaling Plan for Series B Expansion
Team scaling and engineering metrics planning
Uses scaling calculator
0%
100%
Manager:Engineer ratio 1:8
100%
100%
Seniority ratio 3:4:2
0%
100%
Deployment frequency target
100%
100%
Lead time target
100%
100%
MTTR target
100%
100%
Change failure rate target
100%
100%
Test coverage target
100%
100%
Unplanned work target
0%
100%
On-call incidents target
0%
100%
Quarterly hiring timeline
100%
100%
Scaling risks
100%
100%
79%
20%Feature Flag Platform Decision
Build vs buy decision and ADR documentation
Scoring matrix present
100%
100%
Solves core problem: 30%
0%
100%
3-year TCO: 25%
100%
100%
Migration risk: 20%
0%
0%
Vendor stability: 15%
16%
0%
Integration effort: 10%
0%
0%
Buy default rule applied
50%
100%
3-year TCO in ADR
100%
100%
Do-nothing or buy alternative
100%
100%
ADR file path
25%
87%
Reversibility in consequences
70%
100%
ADR status field
100%
100%
README links ADR
83%
100%
96%
5%Engineering Organization Review
CTO advisory output format and proactive alerts
Bottom Line section
80%
90%
What/Why/How to Act sections
80%
80%
Confidence tags used
70%
100%
Evidence-based reasoning
100%
100%
Deployment frequency alert
100%
100%
Tech debt >30% alert
100%
100%
No ADRs alert
100%
100%
Cloud costs alert
100%
100%
Security audit alert
100%
100%
Build time red flag
100%
100%
On-call red flag
100%
100%
Debt ratio formula reference
66%
83%
95%
31%Post-Incident Review and Engineering Culture Overhaul
Blameless post-mortem, culture, and team structure planning
Blameless framing
100%
100%
48-hour retrospective
0%
100%
Root cause: system not person
100%
100%
Crisis communication role
25%
37%
Innovation budget 10-20%
100%
100%
Manager:IC ratio 5-8
0%
100%
Senior:junior ratio 1:2
0%
100%
Documentation as first-class
100%
100%
Blameless culture recommendation
100%
100%
Action items with owners
100%
100%
Does NOT blame individual
100%
100%
- Repository
- alirezarezvani/claude-skills
- Commit
967fe01
- Evaluated
- Agent
- Claude Code
- Model
- Claude Sonnet 4.6
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.