Use this skill when:
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versioncrap-analysisExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches crap-analysis from aaronontheweb/dotnet-skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate crap-analysis. Access via /crap-analysis in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
2
total installs
2
this week
730
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
2
installs
2
this week
730
stars
Use this skill when:
CRAP Score = Complexity x (1 - Coverage)^2
The CRAP (Change Risk Anti-Patterns) score combines cyclomatic complexity with test coverage to identify risky code.
| CRAP Score | Risk Level | Action Required |
|---|---|---|
| < 5 | Low | Well-tested, maintainable code |
| 5-30 | Medium | Acceptable but watch complexity |
| > 30 | High | Needs tests or refactoring |
| Method | Complexity | Coverage | Calculation | CRAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GetUserId() |
1 | 0% | 1 x (1 - 0)^2 | 1 |
ParseToken() |
54 | 52% | 54 x (1 - 0.52)^2 | 12.4 |
ValidateForm() |
20 | 0% | 20 x (1 - 0)^2 | 20 |
ProcessOrder() |
45 | 20% | 45 x (1 - 0.20)^2 | 28.8 |
ImportData() |
80 | 10% | 80 x (1 - 0.10)^2 | 64.8 |
Create a coverage.runsettings file in your repository root. The OpenCover format is required for CRAP score calculation because it includes cyclomatic complexity metrics.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<RunSettings>
<DataCollectionRunSettings>
<DataCollectors>
<DataCollector friendlyName="XPlat code coverage">
<Configuration>
<!-- OpenCover format includes cyclomatic complexity for CRAP scores -->
<Format>cobertura,opencover</Format>
<!-- Exclude test and benchmark assemblies -->
<Exclude>[*.Tests]*,[*.Benchmark]*,[*.Migrations]*</Exclude>
<!-- Exclude generated code, obsolete members, and explicit exclusions -->
<ExcludeByAttribute>Obsolete,GeneratedCodeAttribute,CompilerGeneratedAttribute,ExcludeFromCodeCoverageAttribute</ExcludeByAttribute>
<!-- Exclude source-generated files, Blazor generated code, and migrations -->
<ExcludeByFile>**/obj/**/*,**/*.g.cs,**/*.designer.cs,**/*.razor.g.cs,**/*.razor.css.g.cs,**/Migrations/**/*</ExcludeByFile>
<!-- Exclude test projects -->
<IncludeTestAssembly>false</IncludeTestAssembly>
<!-- Optimization flags -->
<SingleHit>false</SingleHit>
<UseSourceLink>true</UseSourceLink>
<SkipAutoProps>true</SkipAutoProps>
</Configuration>
</DataCollector>
</DataCollectors>
</DataCollectionRunSettings>
</RunSettings>
| Option | Purpose |
|---|---|
Format |
Must include opencover for complexity metrics |
Exclude |
Exclude test/benchmark assemblies by pattern |
ExcludeByAttribute |
Skip generated, obsolete, and explicitly excluded code (includes ExcludeFromCodeCoverageAttribute) |
ExcludeByFile |
Skip source-generated files, Blazor components, and migrations |
SkipAutoProps |
Don't count auto-properties as branches |
Install ReportGenerator as a local tool for generating HTML reports with Risk Hotspots.
{
"version": 1,
"isRoot": true,
"tools": {
"dotnet-reportgenerator-globaltool": {
"version": "5.4.5",
"commands": ["reportgenerator"],
"rollForward": false
}
}
}
Then restore:
dotnet tool restore
dotnet tool install --global dotnet-reportgenerator-globaltool
# Clean previous results
rm -rf coverage/ TestResults/
# Run unit tests with coverage
dotnet test tests/MyApp.Tests.Unit \
--settings coverage.runsettings \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--results-directory ./TestResults
# Run integration tests (optional, adds to coverage)
dotnet test tests/MyApp.Tests.Integration \
--settings coverage.runsettings \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--results-directory ./TestResults
dotnet reportgenerator \
-reports:"TestResults/**/coverage.opencover.xml" \
-targetdir:"coverage" \
-reporttypes:"Html;TextSummary;MarkdownSummaryGithub"
| Type | Description | Output |
|---|---|---|
Html |
Full interactive report | coverage/index.html |
TextSummary |
Plain text summary | coverage/Summary.txt |
MarkdownSummaryGithub |
GitHub-compatible markdown | coverage/SummaryGithub.md |
Badges |
SVG badges for README | coverage/badge_*.svg |
Cobertura |
Merged Cobertura XML | coverage/Cobertura.xml |
The HTML report includes a Risk Hotspots section showing methods sorted by complexity:
Risk Hotspots
─────────────
Method Complexity Coverage Crap Score
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
DataImporter.ParseRecord() 54 52% 12.4
AuthService.ValidateToken() 32 0% 32.0 ← HIGH RISK
OrderProcessor.Calculate() 28 85% 1.3
UserService.CreateUser() 15 100% 0.0
Action items:
ValidateToken() has CRAP > 30 with 0% coverage - test immediately or refactorParseRecord() is complex but has decent coverage - acceptableCreateUser() and Calculate() are well-tested - safe to modify| Coverage Type | Target | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Line Coverage | > 80% | Good for most projects |
| Branch Coverage | > 60% | Catches conditional logic |
| CRAP Score | < 30 | Maximum for new code |
Create coverage.props in your repository:
<Project>
<PropertyGroup>
<!-- Coverage thresholds for CI enforcement -->
<CoverageThresholdLine>80</CoverageThresholdLine>
<CoverageThresholdBranch>60</CoverageThresholdBranch>
</PropertyGroup>
</Project>
name: Coverage
on:
pull_request:
branches: [main, dev]
jobs:
coverage:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- name: Setup .NET
uses: actions/setup-dotnet@v4
with:
dotnet-version: '9.0.x'
- name: Restore tools
run: dotnet tool restore
- name: Run tests with coverage
run: |
dotnet test \
--settings coverage.runsettings \
--collect:"XPlat Code Coverage" \
--results-directory ./TestResults
- name: Generate report
run: |
dotnet reportgenerator \
-reports:"TestResults/**/coverage.opencover.xml" \
-targetdir:"coverage" \
-reporttypes:"Html;MarkdownSummaryGithub;Cobertura"
- name: Upload coverage report
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
with:
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
mattpocock/skills
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
cursor/plugins
ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
pproenca/dot-skills
mattpocock/skills
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: crap-analysis is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
We added crap-analysis from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Registry listing for crap-analysis matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
crap-analysis has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Keeps context tight: crap-analysis is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
crap-analysis is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
crap-analysis fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
Registry listing for crap-analysis matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
crap-analysis reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
I recommend crap-analysis for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
showing 1-10 of 53