name: dialogue-assess-phase description: 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". allowed-tools: Bash, AskUserQuestion, Read, Glob
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:
| Dimension | What It Measures | Key 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
| Recommendation | Meaning | Action |
|---|---|---|
PROCEED | All dimensions satisfactory | Human approves, transition proceeds |
PROCEED_WITH_CAUTION | Minor gaps identified | Human reviews gaps, may proceed with mitigations |
DEFER | Significant gaps present | Address 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:
- Documentation readiness (1-5): Are required phase artefacts complete?
- Knowledge transfer readiness (1-5): Is knowledge documented and shared?
- Stakeholder readiness (1-5): Are stakeholders aligned on proceeding?
- 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
| Parameter | Values | Description |
|---|---|---|
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:
| Phase | Tacit % | Remediation Character |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Initiation | 75% | Primarily dialogue-based |
| 2. Planning | 55% | Dialogue-dominant |
| 3. Requirements | 50% | Balanced |
| 4. Design | 40% | Balanced, slightly artifact-weighted |
| 5. Implementation | 35% | Artifact-dominant |
| 6-7. Testing/Ops | 30% | Primarily artifact/process |
Factor 2: Gap Dimension
The lowest-scoring dimension identifies what type of gap to address:
| Gap | Meaning | Natural Remediation |
|---|---|---|
documentation | Artifacts incomplete | Review/create documents |
knowledge | Tacit understanding not shared | Dialogue, pairing, mentoring |
stakeholder | Alignment issues | Facilitation, workshops |
technical | Blockers, dependencies | Technical 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:
- AI presents assessment summary with recommendation
- Human reviews:
- Component assessment references
- Dimension scores and rationale
- Identified blockers and risks
- Human decides: approve, approve with conditions, or defer
- 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:
- Phase artefacts are complete
- Knowledge is captured and shared
- Stakeholders are aligned
- Technical prerequisites are met
Schema Reference
See Assessment Schema for the complete PHASE_READINESS response schema and validation rules.