audit-library
Skill1 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Score the user's whole component library against the component standard and produce a ranked fix queue. Use when the user wants to know how far the library is from standard, which components need work first, or to plan a standardization pass — e.g. "audit the library", "what's not up to standard?", "what should we fix first?", "score the design system". Each queue item is ready to hand to edit-component.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- selfishprimate/gerillasstheir own version, first seen Sep 16, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- selfishprimate/gerillass★ 171same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- create-componentSkill
- delete-componentSkill
- edit-componentSkill
- use-componentSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 41
no raw hex/px where a token exists
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Forge — Audit Library
Prerequisite: forge.config.json exists at the repo root (run forge init once).
Measure every component against the rules in forge.config.json + the standard
at ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/_shared/references/component-standard.md and
emit a prioritized fix list. This is the bridge between the standard (the rule)
and edit-component (the fix): audit tells you what and in what order;
edit-component does each one.
What it checks
Naming truth comes from the standard's §10 migration map, so the audit can never disagree with the standard about correct names.
Brain-level (always run):
- Naming — symbol renamed per the standard's migration map
- Props verified vs
inferred/partialin the brain - Semantic color values match the standard's vocabulary
- Size scale matches the standard's scale
- Visual/color axes match the standard's prop names
Source-level (only with --repo):
- a11y (ARIA / keyboard /
:focus-visible) - no raw hex/px where a token exists
- files present (tsx + css + stories + test)
- barrel export of symbol + type
Workflow
1. Run the scorer
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/_shared/scripts/audit_components.py" \
--brain "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/_shared/DESIGN-SYSTEM.md" \
--standard "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/_shared/references/component-standard.md" \
--repo <repo-path-if-available> \
--report <out>/audit-report.mdWithout --repo, source checks are listed as deferred — that's expected before
the repo is connected.
2. Read the output
The script prints JSON (components, clean count, fix_items, ranked queue) and
writes a markdown report with a per-component fix table sorted by score (higher =
more to fix). Summarize for the user: how many components, how many clean, the
top offenders, and the fix-type breakdown (how many renames, how many unverified, etc.).
3. Turn the queue into work
Each queue item maps to one edit-component run — non-breaking, per the standard's
deprecation policy. Recommend an order:
- Verify props (
props_unverified) — cheapest, pure accuracy; often justsync_design_system.py --allagainst the connected repo. - Color/size/axis fixes — small, mechanical, alias the old value.
- Renames — highest effort (alias + barrel + deprecate); batch by category.
Offer to kick off the top item via edit-component, or to run the whole queue in
priority order if the repo is connected.
Guardrails
- Audit is advisory — it flags, it doesn't change code. Fixes go through
edit-component(PR into the base branch fromforge.config.jsongit.prBase, defaults tomain). - Naming flags come from the migration map; if a flag looks wrong, fix the map in
component-standard.md, don't special-case the audit. - Re-run after each batch of fixes — the fix queue should shrink toward zero, and
props_unverifiedshould drop as the brain is regenerated from real source.
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
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.

