跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

skill-audit

Audit an application or selected features with a structured checklist. Record evidence for broken behavior, incomplete implementations, and inconsistent patterns, then organize findings by severity and propose a prioritized repair plan.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

原文查看原文说明

Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review

查看安装方法

适用场景

  • Check application features before release
  • Find recurring implementation problems
  • Review button and form consistency
  • Prioritize technical debt fixes

包含的文件(2)

  • SKILL.md12.5 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml166 B

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Host: Codex CLI — This skill was designed for Claude Code and adapted for Codex. Cross-reference commands use installed skill names in Codex rather than /octo:* slash commands. Use the active Codex shell and subagent tools. Do not claim a provider, model, or host subagent is available until the current session exposes it. For host tool equivalents, see skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md.

Systematic Audit Process

Load skills/blocks/engineering-method-selection.md from the installed plugin and apply only the methods relevant to this task. Preserve this entry point's execution contract and output format. Read referenced skills as instructions; do not invoke the current command recursively or add provider calls from a seat.

Overview

Comprehensive, methodical auditing to find issues, inconsistencies, and broken features across a codebase.

Core principle: Define scope → Create checklist → Execute systematically → Report findings → Prioritize fixes.

For architecture simplification, load skills/blocks/architecture-simplification.md. Pin the revision, inspect recent churn and representative callers, then apply the deletion test. Do not recommend removing a small wrapper when it centralizes a security, cleanup, precedence, or failure invariant. A simplify verdict needs source evidence, a concrete caller, and migration and rollback steps.

When to Use

Use this skill when user wants to:

  • Audit entire application for issues
  • Find all instances of a problem pattern
  • Check for broken features systematically
  • Comprehensive quality verification
  • Identify inconsistencies across codebase

Do NOT use for:

  • Security vulnerability scanning (use skill-security-audit)
  • Code quality review (use skill-code-review)
  • Single file searches (use Grep/Glob directly)
  • Performance profiling

The Process

Phase 1: Scope Definition

Step 1: Understand Audit Objectives

**Audit Objectives:**

What to audit: [app features, code patterns, specific issues]
Why auditing: [what prompted this, what problem are we solving]
Scope: [entire app, specific module, particular feature set]
Depth: [surface-level or deep inspection]

Step 2: Define Audit Criteria

Use AskUserQuestion if needed:

**Audit Focus:**

Which aspects should I audit?
1. Functional - Do features work as expected?
2. Consistency - Are patterns applied uniformly?
3. Completeness - Are implementations finished?
4. Quality - Is code maintainable?
5. User-facing - Does UI/UX work correctly?
6. Integration - Do components work together?

Step 3: Create Audit Plan

**Audit Plan**

**Areas to Cover:**
1. [Area 1: e.g., All form submissions]
2. [Area 2: e.g., All API endpoints]
3. [Area 3: e.g., All button states]
4. [Area 4: e.g., All error handling]

**Methodology:**
- [ ] Identify all instances
- [ ] Test each systematically
- [ ] Document findings
- [ ] Categorize by severity
- [ ] Propose fixes

**Estimated Coverage:** [X components, Y files, Z features]

Phase 2: Discovery

Step 1: Identify Audit Targets

Use Glob and Grep to find all relevant code:

**Finding Audit Targets:**

Searching for: [pattern/feature]
Method: [glob pattern or grep query]

**Found:**
1. [File 1:line]
2. [File 2:line]
3. [File 3:line]
...
N. [File N:line]

Total instances: [N]

Step 2: Create Audit Checklist

**Audit Checklist:**

- [ ] Item 1: [component/feature to check]
  - Location: [file:line]
  - Expected: [what should happen]
  - Test: [how to verify]

- [ ] Item 2: [component/feature to check]
  - Location: [file:line]
  - Expected: [what should happen]
  - Test: [how to verify]

...

Total items to audit: [N]

Use task plan tool to track audit progress.

Phase 3: Systematic Execution

Step 1: Execute Audit Checklist

For each item:

**Auditing Item [N]/[Total]: [Description]**

**Location:** [file:line]

**Check 1: [Test name]**
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Method: [how to test - code review, runtime check, etc.]
- Result: ✓ Pass / ❌ Fail
- Evidence: [what you observed]

**Check 2: [Test name]**
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Method: [how to test]
- Result: ✓ Pass / ❌ Fail
- Evidence: [what you observed]

**Overall Status:** ✓ Pass / ⚠️ Issues Found / ❌ Broken

**Issues:**
[If any issues, list them here]

Step 2: Track Progress

Audit Progress:
✓ [1/50] User login form
✓ [2/50] Password reset form
⚠️ [3/50] Registration form (issues found)
❌ [4/50] Contact form (broken)
⚙️ [5/50] Newsletter signup (in progress)
- [6/50] Survey form
...

Phase 4: Analysis & Reporting

Step 1: Categorize Findings

**Audit Findings Summary**

**Critical Issues (Broken Functionality):**
1. [Issue 1]
   - Location: [file:line]
   - Impact: [what's broken]
   - Severity: Critical

2. [Issue 2]
   - Location: [file:line]
   - Impact: [what's broken]
   - Severity: Critical

**Major Issues (Degraded Functionality):**
1. [Issue 1]
   - Location: [file:line]
   - Impact: [what's wrong]
   - Severity: Major

**Minor Issues (Inconsistencies/Polish):**
1. [Issue 1]
   - Location: [file:line]
   - Impact: [what's inconsistent]
   - Severity: Minor

**Passed Checks:**
- [N] items fully functional
- [List if relevant]

Step 2: Provide Statistics

**Audit Statistics**

Total Items Audited: [N]
✓ Passed: [N] ([X%])
⚠️ Issues Found: [N] ([X%])
❌ Broken: [N] ([X%])

**By Category:**
- Critical: [N]
- Major: [N]
- Minor: [N]

**Coverage:**
- Files reviewed: [N]
- Components tested: [N]
- Code paths verified: [N]

Phase 5: Remediation Plan

Step 1: Prioritize Issues

**Recommended Fix Priority:**

**Phase 1: Critical Fixes (Do First)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
   - Why critical: [reason]
   - Estimated effort: [time]

2. [Issue - file:line]
   - Why critical: [reason]
   - Estimated effort: [time]

**Phase 2: Major Fixes (Do Next)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
   - Impact: [description]
   - Estimated effort: [time]

**Phase 3: Minor Fixes (Nice to Have)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
   - Impact: [description]
   - Estimated effort: [time]

**Total Estimated Effort:** [sum of all fixes]

Step 2: Offer to Execute Fixes

**Next Steps:**

I found [N] issues during the audit.

Would you like me to:
1. Fix all critical issues now (estimated [time])
2. Fix issues one category at a time (critical → major → minor)
3. Let you review findings first, then decide what to fix
4. Create detailed tickets/todos for each issue

What's your preference?

Common Patterns

Pattern 1: Audit Entire App for Broken Features

User: "Create a process to audit and check the entire app for things that might be broken"

Implementation:

**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit all user-facing features
- Check for runtime errors
- Verify expected behavior

**Phase 2: Discovery**
- List all features (from routes, components, docs)
- Create comprehensive checklist

**Phase 3: Execute**
- Test each feature systematically
- Document working vs broken

**Phase 4: Report**
- Critical: Features that crash
- Major: Features that work incorrectly
- Minor: Features with UX issues

**Phase 5: Fix**
- Prioritized remediation plan

Pattern 2: Audit for Specific Pattern

User: "Find all instances of direct DOM manipulation and check if they should use React state"

Implementation:

**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit: Direct DOM manipulation patterns
- Goal: Identify React anti-patterns

**Phase 2: Discovery**
- Grep for: document.querySelector, getElementById, etc.
- Found: [N] instances

**Phase 3: Execute**
- Check each instance:
  - Is there a good reason for direct DOM?
  - Should it use React state instead?
  - Is it causing bugs?

**Phase 4: Report**
- List instances that should migrate to React
- List instances that are fine as-is

**Phase 5: Fix**
- Refactor problematic instances

Pattern 3: Consistency Audit

User: "Audit the app for button style consistency"

Implementation:

**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit: All button elements
- Goal: Ensure consistent styling

**Phase 2: Discovery**
- Find all buttons in codebase
- Identify button component(s)

**Phase 3: Execute**
- Check each button against style guide
- Document inconsistencies

**Phase 4: Report**
- Buttons using correct component: [N]
- Buttons with inconsistent styles: [N]
- Buttons using deprecated patterns: [N]

**Phase 5: Fix**
- Standardize all buttons to design system

Integration with Other Skills

With skill-debug

Audit found a broken feature?
→ Use skill-debug to investigate root cause
→ Use systematic debugging to fix

With skill-visual-feedback

Audit found UI inconsistencies?
→ Use skill-visual-feedback to fix visual issues
→ Ensure consistency across app

With skill-iterative-loop

Large audit with many items?
→ Use skill-iterative-loop to process in batches
→ Loop through sections of the app

With skill-security-audit

Audit includes security concerns?
→ Delegate security-specific checks to skill-security-audit
→ Use skill-audit for functional checks

Best Practices

1. Be Systematic, Not Random

Good:

Auditing all form submissions:
1. Login form
2. Registration form
3. Password reset form
4. Contact form
5. Newsletter signup
...
(Methodical, complete)

Poor:

Checking some forms:
- Login form
- Maybe that contact thing
- Whatever else I find
(Random, incomplete)

2. Document Everything

For each audit item, record:

  • What was checked
  • How it was checked
  • Result (pass/fail)
  • Evidence (what you observed)

3. Use Categories

Group findings into meaningful categories:

  • By severity (critical, major, minor)
  • By type (functional, UI, consistency, performance)
  • By component (forms, navigation, data display)

4. Make Findings Actionable

Good:

Issue: Registration form submit button doesn't work
Location: src/components/RegisterForm.tsx:45
Root cause: onClick handler missing
Fix: Add onClick={handleSubmit}
Effort: 5 minutes

Poor:

Issue: Some button broken somewhere
Fix: Fix it

Red Flags - Don't Do This

ActionWhy It's Wrong
Skip creating checklistWill miss things, duplicate work
Test randomly without systemIncomplete coverage
Not documenting findingsCan't prioritize or fix later
Audit without clear criteriaDon't know what "pass" means
Fix while auditingConfuses audit with remediation
Ignore patternsMiss systemic issues

Audit Templates

Template 1: Functional Feature Audit

**Feature:** [Name]
**Location:** [file:line]

**Tests:**
- [ ] Feature loads without errors
- [ ] Feature responds to user input
- [ ] Feature displays correct data
- [ ] Feature handles errors gracefully
- [ ] Feature works on mobile
- [ ] Feature is accessible

**Result:** ✓ Pass / ⚠️ Issues / ❌ Broken
**Issues:** [if any]

Template 2: Code Pattern Audit

**Pattern:** [What to check]
**Instance:** [file:line]

**Checks:**
- [ ] Follows current best practices
- [ ] Consistent with codebase
- [ ] No deprecated APIs used
- [ ] Properly typed/documented
- [ ] No obvious bugs

**Result:** ✓ Good / ⚠️ Needs update / ❌ Problematic
**Notes:** [any observations]

Template 3: UI Consistency Audit

**Component:** [Name]
**Location:** [file:line]

**Checks:**
- [ ] Uses design system components
- [ ] Follows spacing guidelines
- [ ] Uses correct colors
- [ ] Typography consistent
- [ ] Responsive design works
- [ ] States handled (hover, active, disabled)

**Result:** ✓ Consistent / ⚠️ Minor issues / ❌ Inconsistent
**Issues:** [if any]

Quick Reference

Audit TypeDiscovery MethodCheck MethodOutput
FunctionalList featuresTest eachPass/fail report
PatternGrep for codeReview each instanceCompliant/non-compliant
ConsistencyFind all instancesCompare to standardConsistent/inconsistent
CompletenessList requirementsVerify each existsComplete/incomplete

The Bottom Line

Systematic audit → Complete checklist + Methodical execution + Prioritized findings
Otherwise → Missed issues + Duplicate work + No clear action plan

Define scope. Create checklist. Execute systematically. Report findings. Prioritize fixes.

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Interpret the saved results of a completed AI council review. Count verdicts, check whether enough participants responded and whether models are independent, surface substantive dissent, and explain what action the outcome supports.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Explain a completed council review
  • Check vote counts and quorum
  • Assess model independence and dissent
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

Turn a technical choice into a structured debate between different AI model families. Assign explicit positions, launch the discussion, and summarize agreement, disagreement, and a recommendation supported by the strongest argument that survives the debate.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Compare Redis and Memcached for session storage
  • Debate monorepo versus polyrepo organization
  • Examine a technical choice from opposing positions
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

Clarify a feature’s requirements with multiple AI providers, combining technical constraints with user and business needs. Produce a scoped definition covering priorities, edge cases, exclusions, and a requirements checklist before implementation begins.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Defining requirements for a user authentication system
  • Setting boundaries for a notification feature
  • Identifying technical constraints and edge cases
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

Review code or documents with available AI providers before delivery. Combine findings into a scored validation report that checks prior requirements and decisions, separates critical issues from warnings, and recommends next steps.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Review authentication code before release
  • Check API readiness before deployment
  • Review a PRD for missing requirements
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

Develop complex features or business documents by gathering approaches from available AI providers. Combine their perspectives with prior project decisions and quality checks to produce a proposed plan, then proceed with implementation after user confirmation.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Planning and implementing a complex feature
  • Comparing approaches for an external service integration
  • Developing a product requirements document or strategy
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

Research technical or business questions through multiple available AI providers, each assigned a different perspective. Combine usable results into a report covering findings, disagreements, evidence gaps, priorities, and recommended next steps.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Compare libraries and technical approaches
  • Research markets and competitor strategies
  • Synthesize literature from multiple perspectives
nyldn/claude-octopus42692026年10月19日 更新

查看 nyldn 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题