Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHubEnglish overview

wiki-lint

Audit an LLM Wiki for conflicting or outdated claims, broken links, missing concept pages, weak sources, and index inconsistencies. Return findings grouped by severity with evidence and suggested fixes, leaving page content unchanged.

OriginalShow the original description

Use when an LLM Wiki operation issue is a lint or health check. Audit for contradictions, orphans, weak provenance, broken links, missing concept pages, and index/log drift; return triage findings without auto-fixing.

AI rating90/ 100See how to install

Good for

  • Checking wiki pages for contradictions and outdated claims
  • Finding broken links and isolated pages
  • Reviewing sources and missing concept explanations
  • Listing index and log inconsistencies before maintenance

Overview

What it does

wiki-lint audits an LLM Wiki for contradictions between pages, outdated statements, pages with no incoming links, missing concept explanations, broken links, weak sources, and inconsistencies in the index or log. It groups findings by severity. Each finding includes a file path, a short quotation as evidence, a suggested fix, and the type of follow-up work needed.

When it helps

Use it to check accumulated information for disagreements or to help a maintainer prioritize corrections. It also checks claims made outdated by newer source material and terms used across multiple pages without a dedicated page. You can review the findings before proceeding with maintenance.

Example requests

  • “Audit this space’s Wiki and list problems with evidence, grouped by severity.”
  • “Check for broken links, missing sources, and discrepancies with the index.”

Notes

It requires an operation task with operationType: "lint", the target wikiId, spaceSlug, and the space root. Unless explicitly instructed otherwise, it examines only that space. It reads through Wiki tools and does not modify page content or raw/. The exception is wiki/log.md, where it records the total findings and counts by severity. It records the audit even when no problems are found.

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 applies to Wiki audits and returns findings by severity without automatically fixing page content.
Concrete stepsAre steps, inputs, outputs, and examples spelled out?
AGoodIt specifies seven checks, severity criteria, finding structure, log format, and verification before closing.
SafetyAre sending data, deleting files, and running commands disclosed?
AGoodIt limits the audit to the specified space and restricts file changes to `wiki/log.md`.
Easy setupDoes it need few tools or API keys, and are they documented?
BPartly lackingIt lists required identifiers and Wiki tools but does not explain how to set up those tools.

The total counts each point as A = 25, B = 15, C = 5. Rated by AI (OpenAI Codex) as of Oct 20, 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.md3.4 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Wiki Lint

Audit, do not edit. Return findings the maintainer (human or agent) can triage.

Inputs

  • An operation issue with operationType: "lint".
  • The operation issue's target wikiId, spaceSlug, and space root. Lint only that space unless the issue explicitly says this is a multi-space sweep.

Workflow

  1. Walk the target space's wiki/index.md and wiki tree with wiki_search and wiki_read_page, always passing the operation issue's wikiId and spaceSlug. Build a mental map of: pages that exist, pages referenced from index.md, pages referenced from other pages, and raw sources.
  2. Check for the seven recurring issues, in this order:
    1. Contradictions — two pages making incompatible claims about the same entity, decision, or status. Flag both pages, name the conflicting claims, and quote evidence.
    2. Stale claims — a page asserts X, but a newer source under raw/ has superseded it. Flag the older page; never overwrite.
    3. Orphan pages — a wiki/ page is not linked from index.md and not referenced from any other wiki page. Either it should be linked, removed, or merged.
    4. Concept gaps — a term appears on three or more pages but has no dedicated wiki/concepts/<slug>.md. Recommend creating one.
    5. Broken [[wiki-links]] — a link target file does not exist.
    6. Weak provenance — a non-trivial claim is uncited or cites only the wiki itself in a circle. The original source ref should be findable.
    7. Index / log drift — pages exist that are not in index.md, or index.md lists pages that no longer exist. Recent operations in wiki/log.md that did not produce a corresponding page change.
  3. Return a triage list, grouped by severity:
    • critical: contradictions, broken links to active pages, fabricated citations.
    • medium: stale claims, weak provenance, large concept gaps.
    • low: orphans, log drift, small index gaps. Each item has: file path, evidence (a 1–2 line quote), suggested fix, and the operation that should follow up (ingest, paperclip-distill, index-refresh, manual review).
  4. Do not write to wiki/. Lint is read-only by design — the maintainer or the routine that follows decides which findings to act on.
  5. Append a log entry describing the run:
    ## [YYYY-MM-DD] lint | <N findings, M critical>
    - operation issue: <issue identifier>
    - critical: <count>
    - medium: <count>
    - low: <count>
    

Voice

  • Lead with the count by severity.
  • Each finding is one bullet. Resist commentary.
  • When in doubt about severity, say so and surface it as medium with a "verify" note.

Verification

Before closing the operation issue:

  • Findings are grouped by severity with file paths, evidence, and suggested fix per item.
  • No files under raw/ were modified. No files under wiki/ were modified except wiki/log.md.
  • If the run found nothing, the issue is closed with "no findings" and the log entry still exists so future audits can see this run happened.

Tools

wiki_search, wiki_read_page, wiki_list_sources, wiki_read_source, wiki_write_page (only wiki/log.md). Always include the operation issue's wikiId and spaceSlug.

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

add-product-e2e-eval

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Add or extend Paperclip end-to-end evaluations that exercise real browser workflows across the server, database, and runner. Define expected outcomes, check independent evidence, and connect results to the existing reporting pipeline for local or Daytona execution.

  • Adding an evaluation for a complete user workflow
  • Updating test data and outcome checks
  • Including screenshots and artifacts in evaluation reports
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

add-runner-eval

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Add or extend Paperclip Runner evaluations that test real sessions against a mock control service. Define observable pass conditions, validate cases and run selections, and retain source revisions, evidence, and costs for authorized live runs.

  • Adding a focused Runner protocol evaluation
  • Testing grading rules with valid and invalid evidence
  • Updating evaluation selections and campaign membership
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

agent-browser

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Use a real browser to verify web pages and apps through short, supervised interactions. Capture screenshots, inspect errors and network requests, and document reproducible steps for UI bugs or expected behavior checks.

  • Capture screenshots to verify UI changes
  • Read content rendered by JavaScript
  • Reproduce UI bugs and record errors
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

agentmail

FreeSummaryAI rating 100

Read email linked to assigned Paperclip tasks, send new messages or replies through an assigned AgentMail inbox, and check delivery outcomes. Follow task permissions and preserve retry identifiers to avoid duplicate sends.

  • Reading email context attached to an assigned task
  • Sending a new email from an assigned inbox
  • Replying to a specific message in a conversation
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

check-pr

FreeSummaryAI rating 80

Inspect proposed changes in GitHub, GitLab, or Perforce for review feedback, failed automated checks, and incomplete descriptions. It separates actionable findings from informational or resolved comments, then helps fix issues and close addressed review threads when requested.

  • Inspect a change before submission
  • Identify failed checks and required fixes
  • Organize human and bot review feedback
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

company-creator

FreeSummaryAI rating 100

Create an AI agent company or team package from an idea or an existing repository. Define roles, reporting lines, skills, and work handoffs, then generate structured files that follow the Agent Companies specification.

  • Build an agent company from an idea
  • Turn a repository into an agent team package
  • Define agent roles and work handoffs
paperclipai/paperclip106.2KUpdated Oct 22, 2026

See all skills by paperclipai

Report a problem with this skill