audit-triage
Skill1 starsChanged 35 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when existing audit tickets need prioritization, dependency ordering, shared-file or shared-cause fix groups, or a roadmap. Do not create tickets or edit implementation code.
In this repository27 other files it gives its agents.
- architectSkill
- audit-discoverySkill
- audit-initSkill
- audit-nextSkill
- audit-resolutionSkill
- audit-statusSkill
- audit-verificationSkill
- code-to-prdSkill
- codex-ubuntu-serverSkill
- copilot-review-customizerSkill
- create-pluginSkill
- debugSkill
- deep-reviewSkill
- design-promptsSkill
- diagnose-sessionSkill
- feature-scatteringSkill
- human-execution-runbookSkill
- humanizerSkill
- init-repo-instructionsSkill
- inspect-pluginSkill
- install-agent-pluginsSkill
- local-wikiSkill
- recoverSkill
- review-feedbackSkill
- review-repo-instructionsSkill
- uncompromising-handoverSkill
- update-pluginSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 9
Read the runtime invocation contract first.
- Distinctive: line 24
If the workspace is absent or no tickets exist, report that state without initializing it.
- Very specific: line 63
Use deps add/remove for genuine prerequisites.
- Very specific: line 68
Check next --for resolution --json: ticket is the selection.
- Distinctive: line 74
read tickets and canonical export.
- Distinctive: line 76
add or remove dependency edges.
- Very specific: line 77
write optional roadmap files under audit/triage/.
- Distinctive: line 81
do not create tickets unless the user explicitly switches to discovery.
- Distinctive: line 82
do not edit implementation code.
- Distinctive: line 83
do not resolve or verify tickets.
- Very specific: line 84
do not mark tickets PASS.
- Very specific: line 88
Stop when doctor accepts the metadata and next --for resolution --json returns the expected highest-priority unblocked ticket and coherent …
≈ “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
Audit Triage
Read the runtime invocation contract first. Use the bundled Python CLI after resolving AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT and AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR as described there. A separately configured audit_* MCP server is an optional equivalent with an explicit absolute root.
Purpose: plan coherent fixes across tickets, not just assign statuses. Resolve
dependencies and shared-change opportunities, then write decisions, scores,
phases, and fix groups to ticket headers. A prose roadmap is optional;
next --for resolution reads only ticket state.
First move from empty context
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" doctor
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" export --json
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" summaryIf the workspace is absent or no tickets exist, report that state without initializing it. Do not create findings during triage. Treat dependency-wait warnings separately from structural errors; a pending prerequisite is not a corrupt audit.
Update executable metadata
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" triage set 001 --impact 5 --effort 2 --p-level P0 --decision FIX --phase critical-path
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" deps add 001 --depends-on 003
python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" triage set 001 --fix-group shared-parser-fixDependency semantics:
003 blocks 001Ticket 001 is skipped by python3 "${AUDIT_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/audit.py" --root "${AUDIT_PROJECT_DIR}" next --for resolution until 003 reaches PASS.
Scoring
| Field | Values | Meaning |
| Impact | 1-5 | User/data/release impact |
| Effort | 1-5 | Implementation effort |
| Priority | 1-25 | Impact × (6 - Effort) |
| P-level | P0-P3 | Execution priority |
| Decision | FIX/DEFER/WONTFIX/DUPLICATE | Operational decision |
| Phase | critical-path/quick-wins/feature-parity/backlog | Execution group |
| Fix Group | Optional short slug | Tickets that can share one coherent code change |
Grouping and scheduling
- Inspect affected files, call paths, overlapping changes and underlying causes before choosing groups. Prefer one coherent edit session for compatible issues in the same source file or a shared component, rather than repeating the same investigation and patch multiple times.
- Assign the same
--fix-grouponly when work can actually be resolved together. Shared files alone are a suggestion, not proof of a shared fix; identify conflicting edits and dependencies before grouping. - Use
deps add/removefor genuine prerequisites. A deferred, rejected or blocked ticket must not become executable merely because its file matches a selected group. Only PASS dependencies unblock resolution. - Apply every triage decision through the CLI before producing a report or
roadmap. The report is derived from
export --jsonand never feeds the queue. - Check
next --for resolution --json:ticketis the selection;related_ticketsare additional eligible FIX suggestions for shared work, not automatically authorized extra tickets.
Allowed actions
- read tickets and canonical export;
- set triage metadata;
- add or remove dependency edges;
- write optional roadmap files under
audit/triage/.
Forbidden actions
- do not create tickets unless the user explicitly switches to discovery;
- do not edit implementation code;
- do not resolve or verify tickets;
- do not mark tickets
PASS.
Stop condition
Stop when doctor accepts the metadata and next --for resolution --json
returns the expected highest-priority unblocked ticket and coherent suggestions.
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.

