assess

# assess — the expert panel over the whole app Judge the application the way a seasoned leadership review would: several experts, one honest report. Read [CONVENTIONS.md](../../CONVENTIONS.md) — especially the workspace and changelog (§1, §13.1 — the app's memory is your primary evidence), the role dial (§6), the resume sweep (§5), git isolation (§11), gates (§7), multi-agent rules (§8), platform adapters (§9), grounding (§14), freshness (§17), closing output (§18), and data-driven decisions (§19), and the ledger (§2), workspace integrity (§20). **Boundary with `discover`:** `assess` judges the features that exist; when its conclusion is "we need net-new X", hand that to `discover` (or straight to `define` if the user already chose). Don't run both from one ambiguous ask — existing-feature health leads here. If a run is already active, read `state.json.mode` for the multi/single answer instead of re-asking. ## Step 1 — Two questions, once 1. "Run the expert panel as **multiple parallel agents**, or **one agent playing all roles** in sequence?" `[multi/single]` (single-agent runtimes: always inline, §9) 2. "Do you want a **report only**, or **report + a throwaway prototype** of the top improvement so you can feel it before deciding?" `[report/report+prototype]` ## Step 2 — Build the evidence base Scan the repo, `engineering/` (profile, decisions, **feature changelog**), docs. For usage/business numbers, **measure before asking** (§19): derive the questions, write r...