agentleFS
fabioc-alohafabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall/.github/skills/currency-audit/SKILL.md

currency-audit

Skill5 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Comprehensive brain file review — external freshness, internal consistency, semantic accuracy — stamp only after full assessment

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    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 repository6 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. About 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈9

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Every audit item must pass through critical thinking — not just mechanical verification.

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    Before a release that ships brain files to heirs

    line 36
  3. Distinctive:

    After a major external change (new API version, deprecated pattern, VS Code update)

    line 38
  4. Distinctive:

    Run brain-qa and read the stale-file output:

    line 60
  5. Very specific:

    Update lastReviewed: YYYY-MM-DD in frontmatter to today's date

    line 110
  6. Very specific:

    If the file's description changed meaning, update it

    line 111
  7. Distinctive:

    Research once per domain: Check the domain's latest changelog/release notes once, apply to all files in that domain

    line 174
  8. Distinctive:

    Parallel reads: Read 5-6 files at once, note which need changes, then edit in sequence

    line 175
  9. Distinctive:

    Stamp in bulk: After verifying all changes, stamp dates.

    line 176
  10. Distinctive:

    When a file's currency stamp is expired or missing, decide before acting:

    line 196
  11. Distinctive:

    Rule: Never re-stamp without reviewing.

    line 208

≈ “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

Currency Audit

Full assessment: external freshness + internal consistency + semantic accuracy. Stamp only when all pass.

brain-qa.cjs checks the date mechanically (the lastReviewed field). This skill defines the full review that earns that date. A re-stamp means both "content matches external reality" AND "content is internally consistent."


Critical Thinking Discipline

Every audit item must pass through critical thinking — not just mechanical verification. Apply these disciplines throughout:

DisciplineApplication to Currency Audit
Alternative hypotheses"This API exists" isn't enough — is the usage correct? Could the documented pattern be outdated even if the API isn't?
Missing dataWhat's NOT in the file that should be? Missing caveats, undocumented prerequisites, absent error handling?
Evidence qualityIs the file's advice based on official docs, or a single blog post from 2021?
Self-report skepticism"Best practice" claims — verified against what source? "Works on current versions" — actually tested?
Bias detectionAnchoring on the file's current content. Challenge: would you write this the same way from scratch today?
FalsifiabilityWhat would prove this advice wrong? If nothing could, the claim may be unfalsifiable hand-waving
Materiality gateIf this item were stale, would it cause real harm? Prioritize fixes that affect decisions over cosmetic accuracy

The key question at every checklist item: "Am I verifying this is correct, or am I assuming it's correct because it looks plausible?"


When to Use

  • brain-qa shows files with expired or missing lastReviewed dates
  • Before a release that ships brain files to heirs
  • On a scheduled cadence (target: full audit every 90 days)
  • After a major external change (new API version, deprecated pattern, VS Code update)

Quick Reference

StepActionOutcome
TriageRun node scripts/brain-qa.cjs, read the stale-file outputOrdered work list
ResearchCheck latest docs, changelogs, releases for the file's domainDelta list
CompareDiff current content against latest practicesStale advice identified
AuditCheck terminology, cross-references, claims, process logicInternal consistency verified
UpdateFix stale content, wrong terms, broken references, contradictionsFull assessment complete
StampSet lastReviewed: YYYY-MM-DD to today in frontmatterPass restored
VerifyRe-run brain-qa, confirm file passesClean output

Audit Process

1. Triage

Run brain-qa and read the stale-file output:

node scripts/brain-qa.cjs

brain-qa surfaces files whose lastReviewed exceeds the 180/365-day thresholds (warn/fail). Work the failures first, then the warnings, oldest first.

Batch size: 10-15 files per session. Larger batches cause quality drift.

2. Per-File Review Checklist

For each file, work through this checklist:

Frontmatter Check

  • lastReviewed field exists and is a valid YYYY-MM-DD date
  • description accurately reflects current content (not stale summary)
  • For instructions: applyTo patterns still match the intended activation scope
  • No dropped legacy fields present (type, application, tier, currency, inheritance, lifecycle) — see scripts/brain-qa.cjs for the canonical drop list

Content Freshness Check

  • API references: Do referenced APIs still exist? Check for deprecations, renamed methods, new parameters
  • Version numbers: Are pinned versions still current? (Node.js, VS Code API, Azure SDKs, etc.)
  • URL links: Do referenced URLs still resolve? Are they the canonical location?
  • Best practices: Has the community consensus changed? Check official docs, changelogs
  • Tool availability: Are referenced CLI tools, extensions, or services still available?
  • Code examples: Do code snippets still compile/run against current versions?

Semantic Consistency Check

  • Terminology: File uses current terms, not deprecated synonyms (e.g., "skills" not "DK files", "skills/" not "domain-knowledge/")
  • Claims match reality: Do documented features, commands, or capabilities actually exist in code?
  • Cross-references: Links to other skills, agents, instructions, or files are correct and targets exist
  • No contradictions: File doesn't conflict with related files covering the same topic
  • Process logic: If the file documents a workflow, each step's prerequisites exist and outputs are real
  • Architecture alignment: Any structural claims (counts, relationships, directory layouts) match current state

Structural Check

  • No token waste: Remove Mermaid diagrams in non-teaching skills, redundant examples, excessive prose
  • Progressive disclosure: Most important info first, advanced topics later
  • Actionable content: Every section helps the LLM produce better output

3. Update and Stamp

Stamp only after ALL checklist sections pass — frontmatter, freshness, semantic consistency, and structural. A partial review does not earn a date stamp.

  1. Make all content fixes (freshness + semantic + structural)
  2. Update lastReviewed: YYYY-MM-DD in frontmatter to today's date
  3. If the file's description changed meaning, update it

4. Verify

Re-run brain-qa to confirm the file now passes:

node scripts/brain-qa.cjs --stdout | grep "filename"
# PowerShell: node scripts/brain-qa.cjs --stdout | Select-String "filename"

Type-Specific Guidance

Skills

CheckWhat to Verify
Domain accuracyDoes the skill reflect current state of its domain?
Trifecta linkIf workflow skill, does matching .instructions.md exist and align?
Reference filesAre references/ or scripts/ subdirectories still accurate?
ExamplesDo code examples work with current tool versions?

Instructions

CheckWhat to Verify
Routing accuracyDoes applyTo glob match when this instruction should load?
Skill referenceIf instruction references a skill, is the skill still current?
Rule validityAre the rules still correct given current tooling?

Agents

CheckWhat to Verify
Model availabilityIs the specified model still available and appropriate?
Tool referencesDo referenced tools still exist in the extension?
Handoff targetsDo handoff agent names match actual agent files?

Prompts

CheckWhat to Verify
Agent referenceDoes the agent field point to an existing agent?
Workflow stepsAre the prompted steps still valid for current tools?

Muscles

CheckWhat to Verify
Runtime compatibilityDoes the script run without errors on current Node.js?
DependenciesAre @requires dependencies still available?
Output formatDoes the output match what consumers expect?
Dead codeVariables computed but never stored/used? Branches that can never match? Fields extracted but never displayed?

Batch Audit Workflow

For auditing many files efficiently:

  1. Sort by category: Group files by domain (Azure, VS Code, testing, etc.) so research carries across files
  2. Research once per domain: Check the domain's latest changelog/release notes once, apply to all files in that domain
  3. Parallel reads: Read 5-6 files at once, note which need changes, then edit in sequence
  4. Stamp in bulk: After verifying all changes, stamp dates. Use brain-qa to confirm all pass

Common Findings

FindingFix
Deprecated API methodReplace with current equivalent, cite migration guide
Stale version pinUpdate to current stable version
Dead URLFind new canonical URL or remove reference
Outdated best practiceRevise to current recommendation with rationale
Redundant Mermaid diagramReplace with concise prose description
Missing lastReviewed fieldAdd field with today's date after completing review
Legacy frontmatter field (tier, currency, type, application, inheritance, lifecycle)Drop it; see scripts/cleanup-frontmatter.cjs for the canonical drop list

Stale File Decision Table (AC2)

When a file's currency stamp is expired or missing, decide before acting:

ConditionContent Changed?ActionStamp?
Stamp expired, content still accurateNoRe-stamp unchangedYes — review confirmed validity
Stamp expired, minor drift (terminology, links)Yes — minorEdit then re-stampYes — after fixes land
Stamp expired, material staleness (deprecated APIs, wrong patterns)Yes — majorFull rewrite of stale sections, then stampYes — after full review
Stamp missing, file is active and currentN/AAdd stamp with today's dateYes — review confirms currency
Stamp expired, file covers a dead domain (sunset API, retired tool)N/AAdd a ## Deprecated section + docs/deprecations.md row + supersededBy link if a successor existsNo — deprecated files don't get stamped
Stamp expired, file is historical record (plan, ADR, postmortem)N/ARe-stamp with long reviewEvery (or exempt via doc-hygiene convention)Yes — stamp means "confirmed intentionally historical"
Stamp expired, file documents an upstream-dependent capability (SDK, MCP server, external API)Check upstreamResearch latest upstream docs before deciding; record the pinned upstream version in the file bodyOnly after upstream verification

Rule: Never re-stamp without reviewing. A stamp is an attestation, not a date bump.

Related Skills

  • doc-hygiene — Anti-drift rules for living documents
  • skill-review — Five-gate audit (Gate 5 Currency & Coherence is the semantic companion to this skill's mechanical re-stamp)

Would Revise If

Revisit this skill by 2026-08-26 (90 days) or sooner if any of the following fires:

  • Files stamped through this audit are flagged later by self-audit or coherence sweeps as carrying stale content the audit should have caught — ≥3 occurrences in a quarter
  • Re-stamps without content change recur ≥3 times for the same file in a quarter (rubber-stamp pattern)
  • Decisions on equivalent Stale File Decision Table entries diverge across audits ≥2 times in a quarter (decision table too soft)
  • brain-qa.cjs changes the lastReviewed threshold defaults (currently 180-day warn / 365-day fail) — re-tune the 90-day audit cadence accordingly

Track these in docs/ledgers/curation-log.md tagged [CURRENCY-AUDIT-DRIFT].

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.