From cf9617cda57349aaea6563fdb0f92e4a9efd2653 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: saravanakumardb1 <saravanakumardb1@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 12:40:51 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] docs(workspace): add health dashboard prompt

---
 .../workspace-health-dashboard.prompt.md      | 104 ++++++++++++++++++
 .github/reports/health/README.md              |  61 ++++++++++
 2 files changed, 165 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 .github/prompts/workspace-health-dashboard.prompt.md
 create mode 100644 .github/reports/health/README.md

diff --git a/.github/prompts/workspace-health-dashboard.prompt.md b/.github/prompts/workspace-health-dashboard.prompt.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c3d034ee
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.github/prompts/workspace-health-dashboard.prompt.md
@@ -0,0 +1,104 @@
+---
+name: workspace-health-dashboard
+description: 'Audit test health and typecheck status across the current multi-repo workspace and produce a consolidated dashboard.'
+argument-hint: Scope or focus, for example "all repos", "web only", "backend only", "changed repos only", or "failures first"
+agent: agent
+---
+
+Create a workspace-wide health dashboard for the current multi-repo workspace, focused on typecheck status, test health, and execution readiness.
+
+## Scope
+
+- Treat the current VS Code multi-root workspace as the audit boundary.
+- Include all repositories unless the user narrows scope.
+- Prefer documented repo-native commands.
+- Stay read-only unless the user explicitly asks for remediation.
+
+## Discovery
+
+For each repository, identify:
+
+- primary stack and languages
+- available typecheck commands
+- available test commands
+- whether commands are fast, medium, or expensive
+- whether the repository is dirty
+
+## Execution Rules
+
+- Run the smallest reliable command set that gives useful signal.
+- Prefer repo-native commands such as `npm run typecheck`, `pnpm typecheck`, `npm test`, `pnpm test`, `pytest`, `xcodebuild test`, or documented equivalents.
+- If a repo lacks a formal typecheck or test path, mark it clearly.
+- Separate command failures from code quality findings.
+
+## Output Requirements
+
+Produce one consolidated markdown dashboard with these sections:
+
+1. Executive summary
+2. Workspace scorecard
+3. Repo-by-repo status
+4. Failure clusters
+5. Recommended actions
+6. Command log summary
+7. Risks and blockers
+
+## Required Tables
+
+### Workspace scorecard
+
+| Repo | Typecheck | Tests | Dirty | Health | Notes |
+
+### Failure clusters
+
+| Repo | Category | Signal | Likely cause | Suggested next step |
+
+### Action table
+
+| Priority | Repo | Action | Effort | Expected impact | Safe to automate |
+
+## Classification Rules
+
+Use clear labels such as:
+
+- `passing`
+- `failing`
+- `missing`
+- `blocked`
+- `not run`
+
+Use health levels such as:
+
+- `critical`
+- `high`
+- `medium`
+- `low`
+
+## Drill-Down Expectations
+
+For each repo, include:
+
+- what commands were run
+- whether typecheck passed
+- whether tests passed
+- whether failures are setup, environment, flaky, or real code issues
+- the smallest next action
+
+## Default Behavior
+
+If no argument is provided:
+
+- audit all repositories in the workspace
+- prioritize fast typecheck and unit-test signals first
+- produce a single dashboard in the response
+
+## Optional Saved Artifact
+
+If the user asks to save the dashboard, write a dated markdown file under `/Users/sd9235/code/mygh/learning_ai_common_plat/.github/reports/health/`.
+
+## Final Response Style
+
+- start with the highest-signal outcome
+- keep the summary concise
+- surface blockers early
+- end with a short numbered list of next actions
diff --git a/.github/reports/health/README.md b/.github/reports/health/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..3d781185
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.github/reports/health/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+# Workspace Health Dashboard Template
+
+Saved workspace health dashboards should follow this structure.
+
+## Filename
+
+Use a dated filename such as:
+
+- `workspace-health-2026-03-21.md`
+- `workspace-health-web-only-2026-03-21.md`
+- `workspace-health-failures-first-2026-03-21.md`
+
+## Required Sections
+
+1. Executive summary
+2. Workspace scorecard
+3. Repo-by-repo status
+4. Failure clusters
+5. Recommended actions
+6. Command log summary
+7. Risks and blockers
+
+## Required Tables
+
+### Workspace scorecard
+
+| Repo | Typecheck | Tests | Dirty | Health | Notes |
+| ---- | --------- | ----- | ----- | ------ | ----- |
+
+### Failure clusters
+
+| Repo | Category | Signal | Likely cause | Suggested next step |
+| ---- | -------- | ------ | ------------ | ------------------- |
+
+### Action table
+
+| Priority | Repo | Action | Effort | Expected impact | Safe to automate |
+| -------- | ---- | ------ | ------ | --------------- | ---------------- |
+
+## Health Levels
+
+- `critical`: broken typecheck or test infrastructure in key repos
+- `high`: repeatable failures in important code paths or major workflow blockers
+- `medium`: partial failures or missing automation with workable fallbacks
+- `low`: minor gaps with limited impact on day-to-day development
+
+## Repo Drill-Down Checklist
+
+For each repo, capture:
+
+- what commands were run
+- what passed
+- what failed
+- whether the issue is setup, environment, flaky, or code-related
+- the smallest sensible next action
+
+## Notes
+
+- Keep saved dashboards concise and decision-ready.
+- Separate missing automation from true failures.
+- Call out expensive native or mobile validations if they were intentionally skipped.