fable-audit · which guide sections your prompts are missing

This skill answers "which sections of the prompting guides are missing from my rules": gaps to add, and rules that push against a section. Claude Code's own /doctor prompt-audit (2.1.283+) answers the other question, "what in my rules is dated, stale or contradictory": old-model workarounds, stale paths and commands, instruction files that disagree, to remove. The two are complementary; run both when tidying a setup, and don't duplicate the other's job here (a line that is merely old or verbose is not a finding for this audit unless it conflicts with a section).

Checklist: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/fable-audit/references/guide-sections.md (16 sections, verdict rules, conflict signals, suggested wording). Read it before judging anything; do not audit from memory.

This skill never writes. No Edit, no Write, no settings change, not even a "small obvious fix". A user's rule that contradicts the guide is often deliberate. Print the finding and the suggested wording; the user decides, and /fable-setup applies. If asked mid-run to fix something, say that /fable-audit is read-only and name the command that does it.

Arguments

No argument audits this machine's active prompt surface. Otherwise: <path> one file or directory (an agent's system prompt, a project's rules folder) · global (~/.claude only) · project (the current directory only) · plugin (the plugin's own rule texts, for maintainers) · section <n|slug> (one section, in depth: fetch that section's anchor URL from the checklist header for the live wording, then every place it is or isn't satisfied).

Step 1 · Collect (one batch of reads, silent)

Default set:

• ./CLAUDE.md, ./.claude/CLAUDE.md, ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md (honour CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR)
• every *.md in ~/.claude/rules/ and ./.claude/rules/
• ~/.claude/settings.json, ./.claude/settings.json, and CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL (sections 1 and 14)
• the plugin's active rule text: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/hooks/always-on.md, plus autonomy-unattended.md (two paragraphs) and subagent.md. Read ~/.claude/oh-my-fable.json first; if the plugin is disabled or absent, skip these and say so in the header line, because then nothing is covered for free.
• when a path argument names a directory of agent prompts, each file in it is one audited surface

List the files you actually read, with a count. Never claim a section is missing from files you did not open; scope every negative to the paths in that list.

Step 2 · Judge each of the 16 sections

For each section apply the verdict rules in the checklist file:

✅ present · 🟡 partial (say exactly what is missing) · ❌ absent · ⚠️ a rule contradicts the guide · ⚪ not applicable to this surface (harness- or setting-owned, or the work never hits it)

Two rules that decide most of the value of this audit:

• Quote the evidence. Every ✅, 🟡 and ⚠️ names the file and quotes the clause it rests on. A verdict with no quote is a guess; mark it 🟡 and say you could not confirm it.
• Same meaning counts. The guide's wording is not required. A rule that achieves the section's effect in the user's own words is ✅. Only a rule that pushes the opposite way is ⚠️.

Sections 8 and 9 are scored in halves and by item; see the checklist.

Then apply the model notes at the end of the checklist. A note gets a verdict only when the surface names its model (model: in agent frontmatter, or the user said which model it runs on); otherwise print it once as "if this surface runs on <the model the note names>" with no symbol. Notes are never part of the score.

Step 3 · Report (one table, then three short lists)

Fable 5.1 guide audit · <surface> · N files
[table: # | section | verdict | where it is, or what is missing]
Score: X/Y prompt-scope sections (✅ counts 1, 🟡 counts 0.5). Setting: <effort finding>.

Y is the count of prompt-scope sections that apply to this surface — never 16 flat, and say which ones you excluded and why. Then:

1. Conflicts (⚠️) first, most consequential first. For each: the clause, why it now works against the model, and the narrowest edit that keeps what the rule was protecting. Never propose deleting a rule outright when narrowing it preserves the original intent (the checklist calls this out for section 15).
2. Gaps worth closing, ranked by how often the surface hits them, not by section order. For each, the exact line to add and the file it belongs in. Prefer one agent's system prompt over a global rule when only that agent is affected.
3. Already covered by the plugin, one line, so the user doesn't re-add what the hook delivers.
4. Model notes (unscored), one line each, only the ones that apply to this surface.

Ask in the user's language; keep the section names in English so they match the guide's anchors.

Step 4 · Close

One line naming what to do next: /fable-setup for delivery, mode and effort; hand edits for a user's own CLAUDE.md; /fable-status to confirm what is live. Then one more line: "For dated, stale or contradictory text to remove, run /doctor prompt-audit (Claude Code 2.1.283 or later); this audit only finds what is missing." Then one status line: DONE, DONE_WITH_CONCERNS (say which files could not be read), or NEEDS_CONTEXT (say which path you need).

Notes

• The checklist is a snapshot of the guide as of 2026-09-29; the model notes as of 2026-09-29 (Opus 5, Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5 guides) and 2026-10-11 (Haiku 5.5 guide). If the live guide has more or differently named sections, say so in the header line rather than silently auditing an old list.
• Auditing a Claude Code machine is the common case, so sections 4, 14 and 16 usually resolve to ⚪ or a setting finding. That is a correct result, not a thin one.