agentleFS
VladTheProgrammerVladTheProgrammer/claude-asimov/.claude/skills/audit-rules/SKILL.md

audit-rules

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Check all rule files against current codebase for staleness

2 other projects use 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, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the rule file.

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    After checking all files, output a summary table:

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Do NOT modify any rule files.

    line 30

≈ “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 every rule file in .claude/rules/ against the current state of the codebase. For each rule file:

  1. Read the rule file.
  2. For each concrete claim (package names, patterns, constants, file paths, conventions), verify it against the code:
    • Package/import claims: grep for the import pattern. Does it still exist? Has it changed?
    • Pattern claims (e.g., "Route wraps Screen"): check 2-3 actual files that should follow the pattern. Do they?
    • Constant claims (e.g., "max 5 devices", "30 min access token"): grep for the value. Still correct?
    • Path claims (e.g., "strings in values/strings.xml"): check the path exists.
    • Negative claims (e.g., "never use X"): grep for X. Any violations?
  3. Classify each claim as:
    • CONFIRMED — evidence found in current code
    • STALE — code contradicts the rule
    • UNVERIFIABLE — can't confirm from code alone (e.g., behavioral rules)
  4. After checking all files, output a summary table:
| Rule File | Total Claims | Confirmed | Stale | Unverifiable |
  1. For any STALE claims, show:
    • The rule text
    • What the code actually shows
    • A suggested update

Do NOT modify any rule files. Report only.

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.