codebase-audit
Skill1 starsChanged 23 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Audit a repository for material defects and improvement opportunities, then draft prioritized issues.
28 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- lothlorienblade/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- kekzl/imptheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- velonx/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkittheir own version, first seen Oct 30, 2026
- frostney/pascal-mcp-sdktheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
- tomwangowa/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 21, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use cloud-api-recipe-authoring, codebuddy-ide-mcp-upgrade and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
TencentCloudBaseSkillcloud-api-recipe-authoring
Author or revise a cloud-api-operations recipe (config/source/skills/cloud-api-operations/references/recipes/). Encodes why the long tail of control-plane capabilities is deliberately NOT wrapped as MCP/CLI tools, the API-first admission test for whether a capability deserves a recipe, the negative and positive lists, the fixed recipe structure, the writing rules distilled from writing-for-agents, the user-facing copy red lines, and the product regeneration/verification pipeline. Also routes contributors (and their agents) to the contribution flow and the pre-PR self-test protocol in references/contributing.md. Use when adding a recipe, judging whether a scenario belongs in the recipe set, updating the recipes index, re-checking existing recipes against the admission test, or onboarding someone who wants to submit one.
Also in 3 projects that use this
TencentCloudBaseSkillcodebuddy-ide-mcp-upgrade
升级 CodeBuddy IDE(genie 扩展)内置的 CloudBase MCP,以及 MCP 发版时同步 IDE 侧白名单。当用户提到「更新 IDE 里的 MCP」「内置 MCP 版本太老」「IDE 集成的 CloudBase 功能不足」「改工具白名单 toolWhiteList」「把新 bundle 打进 CodeBuddy」「白名单漂移」「MCP 发版要同步什么」时使用。覆盖:解包定位内置 bundle 与内嵌配置、重新构建 mcp bundle、生成新的工具白名单与系统提示词、安全注入 IDE 并备份、用 MCP 协议验证工具清单、人工端到端验收、一键回滚。
Also in 3 projects that use this
frostneySkillnative-nostalgia-stack
Applies the user's FreePascal toolchain and its build, formatting, hook, and test contracts while leaving project-specific mechanics local. Use when scaffolding or working in a FreePascal project that follows this toolchain.
Also in 3 projects that use this
frostneySkillsoftware-engineering-excellence
Applies the user's engineering standards during substantial technical work: preserve scope, use current evidence, delegate independent parts, and complete authorized outcomes. Use during substantial implementation, debugging, refactoring, or multi-part delivery work.
Also in 3 projects that use this
withpiperSkillroadmap-review
Audit roadmap health — issues, dependency order, spec coverage, doc freshness. Use when speccing a new initiative. Use when /phase-plan output looks suspicious. Use before /roadmap-create reruns.
Also in 3 projects that use this
zaxbysauceSkillpr-review-fix
Codex adapter for addressing pull request review feedback in opencode-swarm. Use when the user asks to fix PR review comments, requested changes, reviewer findings, CI-review notes, or a pasted review summary with low false-positive tolerance.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +6 more from TencentCloudBase
Other versions28 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 28
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-ToolKit★ 1.2ksame name
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-MCP★ 1.2ksame name
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit★ 1.2ksame name
- kekzl/imp★ 77same name
- mhylle/claude-skills-collection★ 20same name
- myatminlu/vector-skills★ 18same name
- sohei56/maul-team★ 17same name
- GoldenWing-360/claude-security-skills★ 16same name
- rommelporras/kiro-config★ 13same name
- frostney/pascal-mcp-sdk★ 2same name
18 more not listed
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 repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- add-testSkill
- audit-fixissuesSkill
- autoresearchSkill
- benchmark-optimizeSkill
- circleci-job-resultsSkill
- citation-verifierSkill
- cli-designSkill
- code-cleanupSkill
- deep-code-cleanupSkill
- doc-updateSkill
- emendSkill
- fix-issueSkill
- git-github-workflowSkill
- goal-modeSkill
- inspect-datasetSkill
- manage-pr-lifecycleSkill
- medcognetics-brandSkill
- notify-wakeSkill
- repo-maintenanceSkill
- review-fix-loopSkill
- standardize-ciSkill
- token-file-authSkill
- whats-nextSkill
- yeetSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 28 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
Use public CVE checks for that pass.
- Distinctive: line 22
Keep security work defensive and omit unnecessary exploit details.
- Distinctive: line 24
Do not modify audited source code.
- Distinctive: line 30
Verify bugs with a reproduction or a reachable failure path and violated invariant.
- Distinctive: line 35
Do not present them as confirmed findings.
- Distinctive: line 38
Do not create a goal merely because the audit could be extensive.
- Very specific: line 40
Use issue format when triaging or drafting findings.
- Very specific: line 41
Check open and closed upstream issues for duplicates.
- Very specific: line 42
Use $git-github-workflow for remote access and its authorized connector fallback.
- Distinctive: line 47
Do not close issues as part of an audit.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 28 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.
Files
Codebase Audit
Inspect the supplied repository or current checkout. Include relevant working changes. Exclude generated files, caches, and vendored trees unless they affect shipped artifacts or the requested audit. Prepare evidence-backed findings and desired outcomes without designing fixes.
Audit Scope
Cover bugs, quality, performance, enhancements, and documentation unless the user narrows the scope. Use the rubric for finding admission and relevant vectors.
Limit default cybersecurity work to known public CVE applicability. Use public CVE checks for that pass. Novel vulnerability analysis requires an explicit request. Keep security work defensive and omit unnecessary exploit details.
Do not modify audited source code. Run checks when they can establish a finding without changing tracked files. Record inspected surfaces and unavailable evidence. Missing gates warrant findings when they create a concrete detection gap.
Evidence and Completion
Verify bugs with a reproduction or a reachable failure path and violated invariant. Support performance findings with measurements or a realistic resource argument. Consolidate shared causes. Reject speculative features and subjective style churn.
In Plan Mode, perform a cursory read-only pass and report provisional areas. Do not present them as confirmed findings. Outside Plan Mode, complete one audit of the requested scope. Under an active goal, repeat until a complete pass adds no admissible findings. Do not create a goal merely because the audit could be extensive.
Use issue format when triaging or drafting findings.
Check open and closed upstream issues for duplicates.
Use $git-github-workflow for remote access and its authorized connector fallback.
An audit produces drafts by default. File issues or create labels only when the task authorizes those actions. Honor authorization already given without another checkpoint. Refresh evidence, duplicates, and labels before filing. Do not close issues as part of an audit.
Report inspected scope, findings, evidence, CVE check results, and material gaps. Say when no high-value findings remain. Do not invent findings to fill categories.
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.

