technical-discovery

Technical discovery assesses codebase impact by mapping affected components and dependencies to define scope. It researches a proposed change without writing implementation code, identifying risks and trade-offs to produce evidence-driven findings for planning.

Architecture research and risk identification are conducted by gathering contextual codebase analysis to map dependencies. This process highlights change points and trade-offs, delivering structured, evidence-based findings that guide technical decisions.

Yes, you can scope proposed changes by running a non-implementation research phase. This analysis defines the problem, identifies affected system components, and produces actionable recommendations, ensuring issues are fully scoped before development begins.

A technical discovery report structures issue triage by defining the problem scope, mapping dependencies, and listing evidence-based findings. It guides issue creation by detailing potential risks, trade-offs, and actionable recommendations for the codebase.

No, technical discovery requires no external dependencies or specific frameworks. You provide the problem or question and optional additional context, and it delivers a structured analysis of your codebase architecture and risks.

You should avoid structured technical discovery when you need actual implementation rather than research, or when a problem is trivial and requires no risk assessment. It is designed for comprehensive codebase reconnaissance, not writing code.