agentleFS
FmarzochiFmarzochi/EGC/skills/devops/automation-audit-ops/SKILL.md

automation-audit-ops

Skill61 starsChanged 57 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Evidence-first automation inventory and overlap audit workflow for EGC. Use when the user wants to know which jobs, hooks, connectors, MCP servers, or wrappers are live, broken, redundant, or missing before fixing anything.

8 other projects use a version of this, 6 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

10 rules. 10 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 10

    Common

    Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Common:

    Use this when the user asks what automations are live, which jobs are broken, where overlap exists, or what tooling and connectors are …

    line 9
  2. Common:

    start read-only unless the user explicitly asked for fixes

    line 33
  3. Common:

    do not claim a tool is live just because a skill or config references it

    line 40
  4. Common:

    do not merge or delete overlapping surfaces until the evidence table exists

    line 41
  5. Common:

    Read the current live surface before theorizing:

    line 47
  6. Common:

    If the current state is ambiguous, say so directly instead of pretending the audit is complete.

    line 93
  7. Common:

    do not answer from memory when the live inventory can be read

    line 133
  8. Common:

    do not treat "present in config" as "working"

    line 134
  9. Common:

    do not fix lower-value redundancy before naming the broken high-signal path

    line 135
  10. Common:

    do not widen the task into a repo rewrite if the user asked for inventory first

    line 136

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Automation Audit Ops

Use this when the user asks what automations are live, which jobs are broken, where overlap exists, or what tooling and connectors are actually doing useful work right now.

This is an audit-first operator skill. The job is to produce an evidence-backed inventory and a keep / merge / cut / fix-next recommendation set before rewriting anything.

Skill Stack

Pull these EGC-native skills into the workflow when relevant:

  • workspace-surface-audit for connector, MCP, hook, and app inventory
  • knowledge-ops when the audit needs to reconcile live repo truth with durable context
  • github-ops when the answer depends on CI, scheduled workflows, issues, or PR automation
  • egc-tools-cost-audit when the real problem is webhook fanout, queued jobs, or billing burn in the sibling app repo
  • research-ops when local inventory must be compared against current platform support or public docs
  • verification-loop for proving post-fix state instead of relying on assumed recovery

When to Use

  • user asks "what automations do I have", "what is live", "what is broken", or "what overlaps"
  • the task spans cron jobs, GitHub Actions, local hooks, MCP servers, connectors, wrappers, or app integrations
  • the user wants to know what was ported from another agent system and what still needs to be rebuilt inside EGC
  • the workspace has accumulated multiple ways to do the same thing and the user wants one canonical lane

Guardrails

  • start read-only unless the user explicitly asked for fixes
  • separate:
    • configured
    • authenticated
    • recently verified
    • stale or broken
    • missing entirely
  • do not claim a tool is live just because a skill or config references it
  • do not merge or delete overlapping surfaces until the evidence table exists

Workflow

1. Inventory the real surface

Read the current live surface before theorizing:

  • repo hooks and local hook scripts
  • GitHub Actions and scheduled workflows
  • MCP configs and enabled servers
  • connector- or app-backed integrations
  • wrapper scripts and repo-specific automation entrypoints

Group them by surface:

  • local runtime
  • repo CI / automation
  • connected external systems
  • messaging / notifications
  • billing / customer operations
  • research / monitoring

2. Classify each item by live state

For every surfaced automation, mark:

  • configured
  • authenticated
  • recently verified
  • stale or broken
  • missing

Then classify the problem type:

  • active breakage
  • auth outage
  • stale status
  • overlap or redundancy
  • missing capability

3. Trace the proof path

Back every important claim with a concrete source:

  • file path
  • workflow run
  • hook log
  • config entry
  • recent command output
  • exact failure signature

If the current state is ambiguous, say so directly instead of pretending the audit is complete.

4. End with keep / merge / cut / fix-next

For each overlapping or suspect surface, return one call:

  • keep
  • merge
  • cut
  • fix next

The value is in collapsing noisy automation into one canonical EGC lane, not in preserving every historical path.

Output Format

CURRENT SURFACE
- automation
- source
- live state
- proof

FINDINGS
- active breakage
- overlap
- stale status
- missing capability

RECOMMENDATION
- keep
- merge
- cut
- fix next

NEXT EGC MOVE
- exact skill / hook / workflow / app lane to strengthen

Pitfalls

  • do not answer from memory when the live inventory can be read
  • do not treat "present in config" as "working"
  • do not fix lower-value redundancy before naming the broken high-signal path
  • do not widen the task into a repo rewrite if the user asked for inventory first

Verification

  • important claims cite a live proof path
  • each surfaced automation is labeled with a clear live-state category
  • the final recommendation distinguishes keep / merge / cut / fix-next

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.