diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/complexity-analysis.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/complexity-analysis.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..ba528c473785
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/complexity-analysis.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Code Complexity Analyzer"
+description: "Analyzes cyclomatic complexity and identifies overly complex functions and classes"
+instructions: |
+  You are analyzing code complexity to identify technical debt.
+  
+  Your tasks:
+  1. Scan all source code files in {{ repository_path }}
+  2. Calculate cyclomatic complexity for functions, methods, and classes
+  3. Identify code that exceeds the complexity threshold of {{ complexity_threshold }}
+  4. Look for:
+     - Long functions (>50 lines)
+     - Deep nesting levels (>4 levels)
+     - High parameter counts (>5 parameters)
+     - Large classes (>500 lines)
+  
+  5. For each complex item found, provide:
+     - File path and line number
+     - Current complexity score
+     - Brief explanation of why it's complex
+     - Suggested refactoring approach
+  
+  Return results in a structured format with severity levels:
+  - Critical: Complexity > 2x threshold
+  - High: Complexity > 1.5x threshold
+  - Medium: Complexity > threshold
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository"
+  
+  - key: complexity_threshold
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 15
+    description: "Cyclomatic complexity threshold"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+
+settings:
+  temperature: 0.2
+
+prompt: |
+  Analyze code complexity in {{ repository_path }}.
+  Flag any function/method with cyclomatic complexity > {{ complexity_threshold }}.
+  Provide specific file paths, line numbers, and refactoring recommendations.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/dependency-analysis.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/dependency-analysis.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..63dd8dc0c03f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/dependency-analysis.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Dependency Health Analyzer"
+description: "Analyzes dependencies for outdated versions, vulnerabilities, and maintenance issues"
+instructions: |
+  You are analyzing project dependencies to identify security and maintenance risks.
+  
+  Your tasks:
+  1. Locate dependency files:
+     - package.json / package-lock.json (Node.js)
+     - requirements.txt / Pipfile (Python)
+     - pom.xml / build.gradle (Java)
+     - Gemfile / Gemfile.lock (Ruby)
+     - go.mod (Go)
+     - Cargo.toml (Rust)
+  
+  2. For each dependency, check:
+     - Current version vs latest stable version
+     - Last update date
+     - Known security vulnerabilities (CVEs)
+     - Maintenance status (archived, deprecated)
+     - License compatibility
+  
+  3. Flag dependencies that are:
+     - Critical: Known security vulnerabilities
+     - High: Outdated by >{{ max_age_days }} days or deprecated
+     - Medium: Minor updates available
+     - Low: Patch updates available
+  
+  4. Identify:
+     - Unused dependencies that can be removed
+     - Duplicate dependencies
+     - Heavy dependencies that could be replaced
+     - Missing security patches
+  
+  5. Provide upgrade recommendations with potential breaking changes noted.
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository"
+  
+  - key: max_age_days
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 365
+    description: "Flag dependencies older than this many days"
+  
+  - key: check_vulnerabilities
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: optional
+    default: "true"
+    description: "Whether to check for known vulnerabilities"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+
+settings:
+  temperature: 0.2
+
+prompt: |
+  Analyze dependencies in {{ repository_path }}.
+  Check for vulnerabilities: {{ check_vulnerabilities }}
+  Flag dependencies older than {{ max_age_days }} days.
+  
+  Provide specific upgrade recommendations prioritized by security impact.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/documentation-analysis.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/documentation-analysis.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..970779f19cdf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/documentation-analysis.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Documentation Quality Analyzer"
+description: "Identifies missing, outdated, or inadequate documentation"
+instructions: |
+  You are analyzing documentation quality to identify gaps and issues.
+  
+  Your tasks:
+  1. Check for essential documentation:
+     - README.md with setup/usage instructions
+     - CONTRIBUTING.md for contributor guidelines
+     - API documentation for public interfaces
+     - Architecture/design documents
+     - Inline code comments for complex logic
+  
+  2. Analyze existing documentation for:
+     - Completeness - are all public APIs documented?
+     - Accuracy - does code match documentation?
+     - Clarity - is it easy to understand?
+     - Examples - are there usage examples?
+     - Maintenance - is it up to date?
+  
+  3. Identify specific gaps:
+     - Undocumented public functions/classes
+     - Complex code without explanatory comments
+     - Missing setup/installation instructions
+     - Absence of examples or tutorials
+     - Outdated documentation (check git history)
+  
+  4. Prioritize documentation tasks:
+     - Critical: Public APIs with no documentation
+     - High: Complex code without comments
+     - Medium: Missing examples/tutorials
+     - Low: Incomplete inline comments
+  
+  Provide specific file paths and function signatures that need documentation.
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository"
+  
+  - key: check_readme
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: optional
+    default: "true"
+    description: "Whether to check README quality"
+  
+  - key: check_api_docs
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: optional
+    default: "true"
+    description: "Whether to check API documentation"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+
+settings:
+  temperature: 0.3
+
+prompt: |
+  Analyze documentation in {{ repository_path }}.
+  Check README quality: {{ check_readme }}
+  Check API docs: {{ check_api_docs }}
+  
+  Identify missing or inadequate documentation and provide specific recommendations.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/duplication-detection.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/duplication-detection.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..9837ff927262
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/duplication-detection.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Code Duplication Detector"
+description: "Identifies duplicated code blocks that should be refactored into reusable components"
+instructions: |
+  You are analyzing code for duplication to identify refactoring opportunities.
+  
+  Your tasks:
+  1. Scan all source code files in {{ repository_path }}
+  2. Identify duplicated code blocks:
+     - Similar functions/methods (>{{ similarity_threshold }} similarity)
+     - Copy-pasted code sections (>{{ min_lines }} lines)
+     - Repeated patterns and logic
+     - Similar class structures
+  
+  3. For each duplication found:
+     - Show both/all locations (file paths and line numbers)
+     - Calculate similarity percentage
+     - Estimate lines of duplicated code
+     - Assess refactoring complexity
+  
+  4. Suggest refactoring strategies:
+     - Extract common functions/utilities
+     - Create base classes or mixins
+     - Use composition or inheritance
+     - Apply design patterns (Strategy, Template Method, etc.)
+  
+  5. Prioritize by impact:
+     - Critical: >100 lines duplicated, appears 3+ times
+     - High: >50 lines duplicated, appears 2+ times
+     - Medium: >20 lines duplicated
+     - Low: Minor code similarities
+  
+  Focus on duplications that will provide the most maintenance benefit when refactored.
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository"
+  
+  - key: min_lines
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 10
+    description: "Minimum lines for a code block to be considered duplicate"
+  
+  - key: similarity_threshold
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 0.85
+    description: "Similarity threshold (0.0-1.0) for detecting duplicates"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+
+settings:
+  temperature: 0.2
+
+prompt: |
+  Detect code duplication in {{ repository_path }}.
+  Find blocks >{{ min_lines }} lines with >{{ similarity_threshold }} similarity.
+  
+  Provide specific locations and refactoring recommendations for each duplication.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/test-coverage-analysis.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/test-coverage-analysis.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..31bd6e8a66bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/subrecipes/test-coverage-analysis.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Test Coverage Analyzer"
+description: "Identifies code with insufficient test coverage and missing test cases"
+instructions: |
+  You are analyzing test coverage to identify untested code.
+  
+  Your tasks:
+  1. Locate test files and test frameworks used (Jest, pytest, JUnit, etc.)
+  2. Identify the test coverage reporting mechanism if available
+  3. Analyze which parts of the codebase lack tests:
+     - Public APIs and exported functions
+     - Critical business logic
+     - Error handling paths
+     - Edge cases
+  
+  4. For each file/module below {{ min_coverage }}% coverage:
+     - Calculate estimated current coverage
+     - Identify specific untested functions/methods
+     - Prioritize based on code criticality
+     - Suggest test cases that should be added
+  
+  5. Check for:
+     - Missing unit tests
+     - Missing integration tests
+     - Missing error case tests
+     - Flaky or skipped tests
+  
+  Focus on high-value areas where tests would most improve reliability.
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository"
+  
+  - key: min_coverage
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 80
+    description: "Minimum acceptable test coverage percentage"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+
+settings:
+  temperature: 0.2
+
+prompt: |
+  Analyze test coverage in {{ repository_path }}.
+  Identify code with coverage below {{ min_coverage }}%.
+  Prioritize critical paths that lack tests and recommend specific test cases to add.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/technical-debt-tracker.yaml b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/technical-debt-tracker.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..d6ab35e0c005
--- /dev/null
+++ b/documentation/src/pages/recipes/data/recipes/technical-debt-tracker.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+version: 1.0.0
+title: "Technical Debt Tracker"
+description: "Comprehensive analysis of technical debt in a code repository including complexity, test coverage, documentation, dependencies, and code duplication"
+author:
+  contact: Better-Boy
+
+instructions: |
+  You are a senior software engineer conducting a comprehensive technical debt analysis.
+  
+  Your workflow:
+  1. First, examine the repository structure at {{ repository_path }} to understand the project
+  2. Identify the primary programming language(s) and frameworks used
+  3. Run each sub-recipe to gather specific technical debt metrics:
+     - complexity_analyzer: Identify complex code that needs refactoring
+     - test_coverage_analyzer: Find untested or poorly tested code
+     - documentation_analyzer: Identify missing or outdated documentation
+     - dependency_analyzer: Check for outdated or vulnerable dependencies
+     - duplication_detector: Find duplicated code that should be refactored
+  
+  4. After all analyses complete, create a consolidated report that:
+     - Prioritizes issues by severity (Critical, High, Medium, Low)
+     - Groups related issues together
+     - Provides actionable recommendations with estimated effort
+     - Creates a technical debt reduction roadmap
+  
+  5. Save the report as {{ output_file }} in markdown format
+  
+  Be thorough but focused on issues that will have the most impact on code quality and maintainability.
+
+parameters:
+  - key: repository_path
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: required
+    description: "Path to the code repository to analyze"
+  
+  - key: output_file
+    input_type: string
+    requirement: optional
+    default: "technical-debt-report.md"
+    description: "Output file name for the technical debt report"
+  
+  - key: complexity_threshold
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 15
+    description: "Cyclomatic complexity threshold (functions above this are flagged)"
+  
+  - key: min_test_coverage
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 80
+    description: "Minimum acceptable test coverage percentage"
+  
+  - key: max_dependency_age_days
+    input_type: number
+    requirement: optional
+    default: 365
+    description: "Flag dependencies older than this many days"
+
+sub_recipes:
+  - name: "complexity_analyzer"
+    path: "./subrecipes/complexity-analysis.yaml"
+    values:
+      complexity_threshold: "{{ complexity_threshold }}"
+  
+  - name: "test_coverage_analyzer"
+    path: "./subrecipes/test-coverage-analysis.yaml"
+    values:
+      min_coverage: "{{ min_test_coverage }}"
+  
+  - name: "documentation_analyzer"
+    path: "./subrecipes/documentation-analysis.yaml"
+    values:
+      check_readme: "true"
+      check_api_docs: "true"
+  
+  - name: "dependency_analyzer"
+    path: "./subrecipes/dependency-analysis.yaml"
+    values:
+      max_age_days: "{{ max_dependency_age_days }}"
+      check_vulnerabilities: "true"
+  
+  - name: "duplication_detector"
+    path: "./subrecipes/duplication-detection.yaml"
+    values:
+      min_lines: "10"
+      similarity_threshold: "0.85"
+
+extensions:
+  - type: builtin
+    name: developer
+    timeout: 300
+    bundled: true
+    description: "File system and code analysis tools"
+
+prompt: |
+  Analyze the code repository at {{ repository_path }} for technical debt.
+  
+  Run a comprehensive analysis covering:
+  - Code complexity and maintainability
+  - Test coverage gaps
+  - Documentation quality
+  - Dependency health and security
+  - Code duplication
+  
+  Create a prioritized technical debt report and save it to {{ output_file }}.
+
+activities:
+  - "Scan repository structure"
+  - "Analyze code complexity"
+  - "Check test coverage"
+  - "Review documentation"
+  - "Audit dependencies"
+  - "Detect code duplication"
+  - "Generate prioritized report"
\ No newline at end of file