agentleFS
Sign inStart free
PthahnixPthahnix/De-Anthropocentric-Research-Engine/skills/audit-structure-consistency/SKILL.md

audit-structure-consistency

Skill504 starsChanged 49 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Detect cycles, contradictions, orphans, type violations, and structural incoherence in a knowledge model.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Check hierarchy, dependency, cardinality, and cycle constraints.

    line 23
  2. Very specific:

    If the structure is internally consistent but leaves required areas unrepresented, consider detect-coverage-gap as the next tactic.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not repair a graph silently or call a semantically weak structure consistent merely because it parses.

    line 43

≈ “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.

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

audit-structure-consistency

Purpose

Audit whether a concept, argument, or graph preserves its declared structural relations and constraints.

Input contract

required: [structure, relation_schema, consistency_rules]
optional: [source_structure, version_history, exception_rules]
constraints: [each inconsistency identifies nodes, relation, and violated rule]

Procedure

  1. Validate node types, relation types, direction, and required fields.
  2. Check hierarchy, dependency, cardinality, and cycle constraints.
  3. Compare versions or source structure where supplied.
  4. Emit inconsistencies, valid exceptions, and repair questions.

If the structure is internally consistent but leaves required areas unrepresented, consider detect-coverage-gap as the next tactic.

Output contract

produces: [consistency_report, violated_rules, valid_exceptions, repair_questions]
delta_fields: [findings, uncertainties, open_questions]

Quality gates

  • Rules and exception policy are declared before checking.
  • Structural validity is separated from semantic truth.

Failure and counterexamples

Do not repair a graph silently or call a semantically weak structure consistent merely because it parses.

Provenance map

  • resolved: audit-structure-consistency

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.

Check your setup, free