Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHubEnglish overview

workspace-surface-audit

Audit repository settings, connected tools, and the agent's runtime setup to show what is usable now. Identify missing workflows and integrations, then recommend prioritized ECC skills, automation hooks, agents, or tool connections.

OriginalShow the original description

Audit the active repo, MCP servers, plugins, connectors, env surfaces, and harness setup, then recommend the highest-value ECC-native skills, hooks, agents, and operator workflows. Use when the user wants help setting up Claude Code or understanding what capabilities are actually available in their environment.

affaan-m/ECC
AI rating100/ 100See how to install

Good for

  • Reviewing the current setup before configuring Claude Code
  • Listing connected tools and available capabilities
  • Checking whether more plugins are needed
  • Finding workflows missing around existing tools
  • Prioritizing the next skills and integrations to add

Overview

What it does

This skill reads the active repository and the agent’s runtime environment to identify available capabilities and missing support. It checks configuration files, MCP connections to external tools, plugins, connected apps, and existing ECC skills.

It separates capabilities into three groups: ready to use, tools available but workflows not yet organized, and capabilities requiring a new integration. It then recommends three to five next actions, ordered by impact.

When it helps

Use it to review an initial Claude Code setup or understand the current environment before choosing more skills or plugins. Its findings help you decide whether you need a skill that brings existing tools together, a hook that triggers automation, an agent for a specialized role, or an external integration.

Example requests

  • “Show me what this environment can do and which integrations are missing.”
  • “Review my Claude Code settings and suggest the next ECC skills to add.”

Notes

The audit is read-only. It changes no files unless you request follow-up implementation. It never displays secret values: it reports only service names, capabilities, file locations, and whether keys or settings exist. Recommendations prioritize existing ECC mechanisms.

This overview was written by AI (OpenAI Codex) from the public SKILL.md. Check the original below for the exact behavior.

Objective evaluation

AI rated this skill on four points using only the contents of its SKILL.md. Stars and popularity are not taken into account.

Clear instructionsIs it clear when to use it and what it does?
AGoodIt explicitly describes auditing settings before additions and identifying available capabilities and gaps.
Concrete stepsAre steps, inputs, outputs, and examples spelled out?
AGoodIt lists files to inspect, three audit phases, and an ordered five-section output format.
SafetyAre sending data, deleting files, and running commands disclosed?
AGoodIt inspects .env files but prohibits displaying secret values and changing files without an explicit request.
Easy setupDoes it need few tools or API keys, and are they documented?
AGoodIt inspects existing settings and connections without requiring additional tools or API keys.

The total counts each point as A = 25, B = 15, C = 5. Rated by AI (OpenAI Codex) as of Oct 19, 2026. Treat it as a guide and read the original before installing.

Disagree? Request a re-evaluation

Tell us which point is wrong and why. No login needed. We will check it against the SKILL.md, redo the evaluation, and show the result here.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md5.0 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Workspace Surface Audit

Read-only audit skill for answering the question "what can this workspace and machine actually do right now, and what should we add or enable next?"

This is the ECC-native answer to setup-audit plugins. It does not modify files unless the user explicitly asks for follow-up implementation.

When to Use

  • User says "set up Claude Code", "recommend automations", "what plugins or MCPs should I use?", or "what am I missing?"
  • Auditing a machine or repo before installing more skills, hooks, or connectors
  • Comparing official marketplace plugins against ECC-native coverage
  • Reviewing .env, .mcp.json, plugin settings, or connected-app surfaces to find missing workflow layers
  • Deciding whether a capability should be a skill, hook, agent, MCP, or external connector

Non-Negotiable Rules

  • Never print secret values. Surface only provider names, capability names, file paths, and whether a key or config exists.
  • Prefer ECC-native workflows over generic "install another plugin" advice when ECC can reasonably own the surface.
  • Treat external plugins as benchmarks and inspiration, not authoritative product boundaries.
  • Separate three things clearly:
    • already available now
    • available but not wrapped well in ECC
    • not available and would require a new integration

Audit Inputs

Inspect only the files and settings needed to answer the question well:

  1. Repo surface
    • package.json, lockfiles, language markers, framework config, README.md
    • .mcp.json, .lsp.json, .claude/settings*.json, .codex/*
    • AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, install manifests, hook configs
  2. Environment surface
    • .env* files in the active repo and obvious adjacent ECC workspaces
    • Surface only key names such as STRIPE_API_KEY, TWILIO_AUTH_TOKEN, FAL_KEY
  3. Connected tool surface
    • Installed plugins, enabled connectors, MCP servers, LSPs, and app integrations
  4. ECC surface
    • Existing skills, commands, hooks, agents, and install modules that already cover the need

Audit Process

Phase 1: Inventory What Exists

Produce a compact inventory:

  • active harness targets
  • installed plugins and connected apps
  • configured MCP servers
  • configured LSP servers
  • env-backed services implied by key names
  • existing ECC skills already relevant to the workspace

If a surface exists only as a primitive, call that out. Example:

  • "Stripe is available via connected app, but ECC lacks a billing-operator skill"
  • "Google Drive is connected, but there is no ECC-native Google Workspace operator workflow"

Phase 2: Benchmark Against Official and Installed Surfaces

Compare the workspace against:

  • official Claude plugins that overlap with setup, review, docs, design, or workflow quality
  • locally installed plugins in Claude or Codex
  • the user's currently connected app surfaces

Do not just list names. For each comparison, answer:

  1. what they actually do
  2. whether ECC already has parity
  3. whether ECC only has primitives
  4. whether ECC is missing the workflow entirely

Phase 3: Turn Gaps Into ECC Decisions

For every real gap, recommend the correct ECC-native shape:

Gap TypePreferred ECC Shape
Repeatable operator workflowSkill
Automatic enforcement or side-effectHook
Specialized delegated roleAgent
External tool bridgeMCP server or connector
Install/bootstrap guidanceSetup or audit skill

Default to user-facing skills that orchestrate existing tools when the need is operational rather than infrastructural.

Output Format

Return five sections in this order:

  1. Current surface
    • what is already usable right now
  2. Parity
    • where ECC already matches or exceeds the benchmark
  3. Primitive-only gaps
    • tools exist, but ECC lacks a clean operator skill
  4. Missing integrations
    • capability not available yet
  5. Top 3-5 next moves
    • concrete ECC-native additions, ordered by impact

Recommendation Rules

  • Recommend at most 1-2 highest-value ideas per category.
  • Favor skills with obvious user intent and business value:
    • setup audit
    • billing/customer ops
    • issue/program ops
    • Google Workspace ops
    • deployment/ops control
  • If a connector is company-specific, recommend it only when it is genuinely available or clearly useful to the user's workflow.
  • If ECC already has a strong primitive, propose a wrapper skill instead of inventing a brand-new subsystem.

Good Outcomes

  • The user can immediately see what is connected, what is missing, and what ECC should own next.
  • Recommendations are specific enough to implement in the repo without another discovery pass.
  • The final answer is organized around workflows, not API brands.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

accessibility

FreeSummary

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-architecture-audit

FreeSummaryAI rating 80

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-eval

FreeSummaryAI rating 80

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-harness-construction

FreeSummary

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-introspection-debugging

FreeSummaryAI rating 100

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 5, 2026

agent-introspection-debugging

FreeSummaryAI rating 100

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC283.6KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

See all skills by affaan-m

Report a problem with this skill