/scout — External Link Analysis

Analyze an external URL (tech blog, tool, library, methodology) to evaluate its fit with the oh-my-customcode project and auto-create a GitHub issue with a structured verdict.

Usage

/scout <url>
/scout https://news.hada.io/topic?id=27673
/scout https://github.com/user/repo

Verdict Taxonomy

Verdict	Meaning	Label	Follow-up
INTERNALIZE	Aligns with project philosophy; should become a skill/agent/guide	scout:internalize + P1/P2/P3	/research or direct implementation
INTEGRATE	Useful but best kept as external dependency	scout:integrate + P2/P3	Plugin/MCP integration review
SKIP	Irrelevant or duplicates existing functionality	scout:skip	Issue created then closed

Pre-flight Guards

Guard 1: URL Validity (GATE)

Before any work, validate the URL:

# Check URL is syntactically valid
echo "$URL" | grep -qE '^https?://'

If invalid: [Pre-flight] GATE: Invalid or unreachable URL. Please check and retry. — abort.

Guard 2: Duplicate Scout (WARN)

Search existing GitHub issues for prior scout reports on the same URL domain:

DOMAIN=$(echo "$URL" | sed 's|https\?://||' | cut -d'/' -f1)
gh issue list --state all --label "scout:internalize,scout:integrate,scout:skip" \
  --json number,title,body --jq ".[] | select(.body | contains(\"$DOMAIN\"))" 2>/dev/null

If found: [Pre-flight] WARN: Similar URL already scouted in issue #N. Proceed anyway? [Y/n]

Display Format

Before execution, show the plan:

[Scout] {url}
├── Phase 1: Fetch & Summarize
├── Phase 2: Load Project Philosophy
├── Phase 3: Fit Analysis (sonnet)
└── Phase 4: Issue Creation

Estimated: ~1 min | Cost: ~$0.5-1.5
Execute? [Y/n]

Workflow

Phase 1: Fetch & Summarize

1. WebFetch(url) — retrieve page content
2. Extract core information:
   • Title and purpose
   • Key technology / methodology
   • Approach and principles
3. If fetch fails — report error, abort

Phase 2: Load Project Philosophy

1. Read(CLAUDE.md) — extract architecture philosophy:
   • Compilation metaphor (source -> build -> artifact)
   • Separation of concerns (R006)
   • Dynamic agent creation ("no expert? create one")
   • Skill/agent/guide/rule structure
2. Read(README.md) — extract project overview and component inventory
3. Glob(.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md) — list existing skills for overlap detection

Phase 3: Fit Analysis

Spawn 1 sonnet agent with the following analysis prompt.

Inputs:

• Fetched content summary (Phase 1)
• Project philosophy context (Phase 2)
• Existing skill list (Phase 2)

Analysis dimensions:

Dimension	Question
Philosophy alignment	Does it match the compilation metaphor, separation of concerns, "create experts on demand"?
Technical fit	Does it complement or overlap with existing skills/agents/guides?
Integration effort	How much work to internalize vs. use externally?
Value proposition	What concrete benefit does it bring to the project?

Agent prompt template:

You are a project fit analyst. Given:

1. External content summary:
{phase1_summary}

2. Project philosophy:
{phase2_philosophy}

3. Existing skills ({skill_count} total):
{skill_list}

Analyze the external content against the project philosophy across 4 dimensions:
- Philosophy alignment
- Technical fit (overlap with existing skills?)
- Integration effort (XS/S/M/L)
- Value proposition

Return a structured verdict:
- verdict: INTERNALIZE | INTEGRATE | SKIP
- priority: P1 | P2 | P3
- rationale: 2-3 sentences
- philosophy_table: criterion/fit/rationale for each dimension
- recommendation: specific integration plan or skip reason
- next_steps: 2-3 actionable items
- escalation: true/false (INTERNALIZE + M/L effort = true)

Output: Structured verdict with rationale.

Phase 4: Issue Creation

1. Ensure scout labels exist (defensive, idempotent):

gh label create "scout:internalize" --color "0E8A16" --description "Scout: should be internalized" 2>/dev/null || true
gh label create "scout:integrate" --color "1D76DB" --description "Scout: keep as external" 2>/dev/null || true
gh label create "scout:skip" --color "D4C5F9" --description "Scout: skip" 2>/dev/null || true

2. Create GitHub issue:

gh issue create \
  --title "[scout:{verdict}] {content_title}" \
  --label "scout:{verdict},P{n}" \
  --body "{issue_body}"

3. If verdict is SKIP: auto-close the issue:

gh issue close {number} -c "Auto-closed: scout verdict is SKIP"

Issue Body Template

## Scout Report: {title}

**Source**: {url}
**Verdict**: {INTERNALIZE / INTEGRATE / SKIP}
**Priority**: {P1 / P2 / P3}

## Summary
{2-3 sentence summary of the external content}

## Philosophy Alignment
| Criterion | Fit | Rationale |
|-----------|-----|-----------|
| Compilation metaphor | {check/cross} | {explanation} |
| Separation of concerns (R006) | {check/cross} | {explanation} |
| Dynamic agent creation | {check/cross} | {explanation} |
| Existing skill overlap | {check/cross} | {overlapping skills list} |

## Recommendation
{Specific integration plan — which skill/agent/guide to create, or why to skip}

## Next Steps
- [ ] {follow-up action 1}
- [ ] {follow-up action 2}

---
Generated by `/scout`

Escalation

When verdict is INTERNALIZE and integration effort is M or L:

[Advisory] Deep analysis recommended.
└── Consider running: /research {url}

Result Display

[Scout Complete] {title}
├── Verdict: {INTERNALIZE / INTEGRATE / SKIP}
├── Priority: {P1 / P2 / P3}
├── Issue: #{number}
└── Escalation: {/research recommended | none}

Model Selection

Phase	Model	Rationale
Phase 1 (Fetch)	orchestrator	Simple WebFetch, no agent needed
Phase 2 (Load)	orchestrator	Simple Read/Glob, no agent needed
Phase 3 (Analysis)	sonnet	Balanced reasoning for fit analysis
Phase 4 (Issue)	orchestrator	gh issue create via Bash

Integration

Rule	How
R009	Single agent in Phase 3 — no parallelism needed
R010	Orchestrator manages phases 1/2/4; analysis delegated to sonnet agent in Phase 3
R015	Display scout plan before execution (Display Format section)

When NOT to Use

Scenario	Better Alternative
Deep multi-source research	/research <url>
Internal project analysis	/omcustom:analysis
Known tool evaluation	Direct agent conversation
Bulk URL analysis (5+)	/research with URL list

Differences from /research

Aspect	/scout	/research
Purpose	Quick fit evaluation	Deep multi-dimensional analysis
Teams	1 agent	10 teams
Cost	~$0.5-1.5	~$8-15
Duration	1-2 min	10-20 min
Output	Issue with verdict	Full report with ADOPT/ADAPT/AVOID
When	First contact with new link	Deep dive after scout recommends