audit-payment-system
Skill9 starsChanged 42 days agoMITView on GitHub
Read-only audit of payment and money-movement code, scoped from Stripe Checkout to in-house ledgers. Use when "audit payment system", "double charge / idempotency", "ledger / reconciliation", or "webhook / 3DS / PCI". IAP → audit-monetization-iap.
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- kensaurus/skillsedited, first seen Oct 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- kensaurus/skills★ 954% same
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 repository165 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .cursor/rules/approved-plan-execution.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/skill-workflows.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/verification-before-completion.mdcCursor rule
- llms.txtllms.txt
- audit-accessibilitySkill
- audit-agent-speedSkill
- audit-analyticsSkill
- audit-auth-flowsSkill
- audit-backend-architectureSkill
- audit-bundle-sizeSkill
- audit-cicdSkill
- audit-codemod-safetySkill
- audit-code-qualitySkill
- audit-code-reviewSkill
- audit-db-schemaSkill
- audit-doctrineSkill
- audit-env-paritySkill
- audit-fe-apiSkill
- audit-gate-logicSkill
- audit-i18nSkill
- audit-infra-costSkill
- audit-langfuse-llmSkill
- audit-llm-securitySkill
- audit-monetization-iapSkill
- audit-performanceSkill
- audit-realworldSkill
- audit-registry-listingSkill
- audit-resilienceSkill
- audit-responsiveSkill
- audit-securitySkill
- audit-skill-conflictsSkill
- audit-ui-statesSkill
- audit-uiux-design-systemSkill
- audit-ux-journeysSkill
- audit-uxSkill
- backend-db-performanceSkill
- backend-error-handlingSkill
- backend-observabilitySkill
- backend-patternsSkill
- backend-realtimeSkill
- burndown-fullSkill
- complete-everythingSkill
- data-pipelineSkill
- data-visualizationSkill
- debug-errorSkill
- debug-fe-be-integrationSkill
- debug-sentry-monitorSkill
- deploy-npmSkill
- deploy-verifySkill
- design-apiSkill
- design-canvasSkill
- design-emailSkill
- design-frontendSkill
- design-generative-artSkill
- design-mobile-firstSkill
- design-motionSkill
- design-prdSkill
- design-systemSkill
- design-themeSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 19
Read-only. Assess and prioritize.
- Very specific: line 20
STOP-and-confirm surface — findings feed a human-reviewed remediation run at high effort with a fresh-context reviewer.
- Distinctive: line 37
Not every app needs an in-house double-entry ledger.
- Very specific: line 101
If there is no money movement (no PSP, no charge/ledger paths), stop and report reduced applicability.
- Very specific: line 108
Follow /research. Anchor to the installed SDK version and the provider's *current* API (e.g.
≈ “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-payment-system — Money-Movement Correctness & Compliance Audit
Degree of freedom: MIXED — Scope, matrix, and severity [HIGH freedom];
Phase 0 detection searches [LOW freedom — run exactly]. Do not write
exploit or payment-fraud PoCs — quote the missing control, never a replay
or spoof recipe.
Read-only. Assess and prioritize; do not change code. Payment code is a
STOP-and-confirm surface — findings feed a human-reviewed remediation run at
high effort with a fresh-context reviewer. Delegations: per-call resilience → audit-resilience;
PCI/secrets/authz → audit-security; ledger schema → audit-db-schema;
outbox/saga structure → audit-backend-architecture; append-only
integrity → plan-data-integrity; Stripe integration → the Stripe plugin
skills. This skill owns payment-domain correctness.
Payment failures are silent: a retried charge is a double-charge, a lost ledger write is vanished money, a logged PAN is PCI liability, an unverified webhook is an untrusted "paid". Three pillars: idempotency, a double-entry ledger (when in scope), reconciliation — plus PCI DSS v4.0.1 and webhooks as source of truth (never trust the sync API response alone).
Core principle — earn each control by scope; every gap is money or liability
Not every app needs an in-house double-entry ledger. Stripe Checkout offloads ledger, settlement, and most PCI — flagging "no double-entry ledger" there is noise. Idempotency, webhook verification, state sync, and tokens-only apply to everyone who moves money. Gate depth by scope (Phase 0). Critical = a customer is charged twice, money is lost/unaccounted, or card data is exposed. There is no "low severity" for a double-charge.
How to reason — Observe → Interpret → Classify → Severity
- Observe — quote the mutation/webhook/ledger
file:line(or "searched, none found") - Interpret — what money or liability path breaks if that control is missing?
- Classify — Implemented / Partial / Missing / N/A (tier reason); control id (A1–G4)
- Severity — double-charge, lost money, or PAN/CVV exposure = Critical; P2-only rows are N/A on P0
Worked example
Observe: P0 Stripe Checkout.
POST /api/checkoutcallspaymentIntents.createwith no idempotency key and no unique business-intent constraint (app/api/checkout/route.ts). Webhook handler updates order status from the parsed body withoutconstructEvent/ signature verification (app/api/stripe/route.ts). Interpret: a network retry can create two PaymentIntents for one checkout; an unverified webhook is not a trusted state change. Classify: Missing A1 + Missing C2. Ledger rows B* are N/A (P0). Severity: Critical — double-charge and untrusted "paid" are in-scope. Finding: A1+C2 | checkout + webhook routes | Critical | add intent-scoped idempotency + verify-then-process. Do not demonstrate a replay or spoof.
Phase 0 — Detect payment surfaces & scope (gates every later finding) [LOW freedom — run exactly]
Find the money paths and the provider first. Never report an in-house-ledger
control as "Missing" on a pure merchant-integrator (N/A with a reason).
# Provider / SDK
rg -n --hidden -g '!node_modules' -i "stripe|paypal|braintree|adyen|square|payjp|paypay|razorpay|checkout\.com|worldpay|mollie|@stripe/|payment_intent|paymentintent" -l
# Money-movement verbs
rg -n -i "\b(charge|capture|authoriz|refund|void|payout|settle|chargeback|dispute|reversal)\b" -l
# Webhook endpoints + signature
rg -n -i "webhook|/webhooks?|constructEvent|verifyHeader|Stripe-Signature|x-signature|hmac" -l
# Idempotency
rg -n -i "idempotenc|idempotency[-_]?key|Idempotency-Key" -l
# Ledger / accounting
rg -n -i "ledger|double[-_ ]entry|debit|credit|journal|balance|posting|book(keeping)?" -l
# Reconciliation / settlement
rg -n -i "reconcil|settlement|settle|payout report|balance_transaction|three[-_ ]way" -l
# Money type (float smell = red flag)
rg -n -i "amount|price|money|currency|minor[-_ ]unit|cents" -g '*.{ts,tsx,js,py,go,java,rb,cs,sql}' -l
# Fraud / risk / SCA
rg -n -i "fraud|risk|velocity|3ds|3-?d ?secure|sca|radar|device.?fingerprint" -l
# Card-data smell (should find NOTHING raw)
rg -n -i "card[-_ ]?number|\bpan\b|cvv|cvc|card\.number|primary_account" -lRecord a payment profile and pick the tier — apply only in-scope rows:
| Tier | Signals | In scope |
| P0 — Merchant integrator | uses hosted Checkout / PaymentIntents / a PSP SDK; PSP holds the money & ledger | Idempotency on mutations, webhook verify+dedup, payment-state sync (pull-based recovery), refund/void idempotency, tokens-only/PCI-SAQ scope, light recon vs PSP dashboard, resilience around PSP calls |
| P1 — Platform / marketplace | Connect-style split payments, payouts to sellers, multi-party balances | + payout/clawback saga, an internal ledger for balances owed, multi-party reconciliation, dispute→clawback flow |
| P2 — Gateway / PSP / wallet / fintech | own ledger, direct acquirer/bank/card-network, issues balances | + full double-entry append-only ledger, 3-way reconciliation (ledger↔settlement↔bank), settlement-file ingestion, sharding/serialized balance updates, in-house fraud engine, AML/sanctions, PCI DSS Level 1 |
If there is no money movement (no PSP, no charge/ledger paths), stop and report reduced
applicability. If card data appears in the last rg above, that is Critical, report immediately.
Phase 1 — Research (version-anchored, provider-aware) [HIGH freedom]
Follow /research. Anchor to the installed SDK version and the provider's
current API (e.g. Stripe PaymentIntents, not the legacy Charges API).
Confirm the current-year shape of the controls before judging the code.
When the provider is Stripe and the Stripe MCP is connected, use it as the authoritative source. This pack does not bundle it (mcp/ ships Firecrawl, Context7 and Supabase); connect Stripe's own MCP or plugin, or else follow /research against docs.stripe.com for the same checks:
- Concepts / best practice (idempotency keys, webhook signature verification,
PaymentIntents lifecycle, SCA/3DS2, Radar) —
search_stripe_documentationwithsearch_only_api_ref: false. - Exact API params the integration should be sending —
stripe_api_searchthenstripe_api_detailson the operation id (confirmPaymentIntent.createis called with an idempotency key and amounts in minor units).
For PayPal / Square / Adyen / PayPay / Braintree / others, the Stripe MCP
does not apply — use /research against the provider's official docs. Never
invent a param or endpoint the provider doesn't expose.
Phase 2 — Payment correctness matrix [HIGH freedom]
For each in-scope row, mark Implemented / Partial / Missing / N/A with
file:line, a one-line "why it bites in prod", and the fix-delegate. Full
detection commands, good-vs-red-flag signals, and fix targets are in
references/checklist.md — load it and work the
applicable groups.
Groups and the tier that owns them:
- A. Money-movement correctness (P0+) — A1 idempotency on every mutation, A2 dedup / stored result, A3 payment state machine, A4 money as integer minor units, A5 multi-currency & FX
- B. Ledger & data integrity (P1 internal balances · P2 full ledger) — B1 double-entry, B2 append-only / immutable, B3 balance derived & snapshotted separately, B4 auditability, B5 schema for scale
- C. Async orchestration & webhook delivery (P0+) — C1 sync-auth vs async-everything, C2 webhook signature verified, C3 event-id dedup + 200-then-process, C4 atomic state+ledger+outbox, C5 pull-based recovery for stuck payments, C6 refund/dispute/payout as saga
- D. Reconciliation & settlement (P1/P2) — D1 automated daily reconciliation, D2 3-way match + break report, D3 discrepancy handling, D4 safety brake
- E. Fraud, risk & SCA (P0 delegate · P1/P2 in-house) — E1 risk scoring pre-auth, E2 3DS2 / SCA step-up, E3 fraud-service failure policy, E4 chargeback / dispute monitoring, E5 AML / sanctions
- F. Compliance & security — PCI DSS v4.0.1 (all tiers) — F1 never store/log PAN or CVV, F2 tokenization, F3 key rotation & secret handling, F4 access audit
- G. Error handling & resilience (P0+) — G1 PSP/bank API timeout + retry + circuit breaker, G2 bulkhead / pool isolation, G3 partial-write safety, G4 graceful degradation Full matrix (control | bites in prod if missing | fix via): references/matrix.md.
Rules:
- Evidence or it didn't happen — every verdict cites
file:lineor "searched, none found". - N/A is first-class — record why (scope tier), don't drop the row.
- No double-counting — link per-call resilience to
audit-resilience, PCI toaudit-security. - No PoCs — do not write replay, spoof, or card-testing procedures.
Phase 3 — Prioritized report (read-only) [HIGH freedom]
One markdown report: header (provider(s), scope tier + evidence, in-scope groups, N/A rows + why); a Critical table (finding | control | file:line | why it bites | fix via) for money loss, double-charge, and card-data exposure; a High / Medium matrix summary per group (Implemented | Partial | Missing | N/A | fix via); and a lift-to-production roadmap ordered by blast radius — idempotency → verify + dedup webhooks → atomic state+ledger+outbox and pull-based recovery → [P1/P2] double-entry ledger + daily reconciliation → tokens-only + key rotation + access audit → breaker/bulkhead + fraud fail-policy. Report skeleton with example rows: references/report-template.md.
Forbidden: declaring "production-grade" from passing tests alone; flagging P2-only controls
(in-house ledger, 3-way bank match, sharding) against a P0 merchant integrator; re-auditing per-call
timeouts/retries audit-resilience owns; assigning any severity below Critical to a double-charge,
lost-money, or PAN-exposure finding; recommending a refund/payout saga without compensation logic;
writing exploit or payment-fraud PoCs; editing payment code — this skill reports;
remediation is human-reviewed, runs at high effort, and keeps the approved-plan-execution rule's STOP-and-ask on payment code.
Self-critique before reporting [LOW freedom — do not skip]
- Evidenced —
file:lineor "searched, none found", not "webhooks are probably signed" - No PoC — finding names the missing control; no replay, spoof, or card-testing steps
- Tier respected — P2 ledger / 3-way match are N/A on P0, with why
- Severity justified — double-charge, lost money, or PAN/CVV = Critical
- Right owner — IAP / StoreKit →
audit-monetization-iap; per-call retry →audit-resilience - Nothing edited — STOP-and-confirm; human-reviewed remediation only
Related
audit-resilience— per-call idempotency keys, timeouts, retry+backoff+jitter, circuit breaker, cancellationaudit-security— PCI/PAN handling, webhook auth, secrets, key rotation, injection, access loggingaudit-db-schema— double-entry ledger schema, append-only constraints, money types, partitioningaudit-backend-architecture— outbox/saga/breaker structure and topology fit (this skill checks payment correctness on top)plan-data-integrity— append-only/immutability guarantees and destructive-op safetyplan-secrets-audit— rotate vs relocate provider API/signing keysbackend-patterns/backend-patterns/references/architecture-patterns.md— implement idempotency, outbox, saga, state machinedata-pipeline— reconciliation/settlement ingestion jobs- the Stripe plugin skills (
stripe-best-practices,connect-recommend,upgrade-stripe) — Stripe-specific integration audit-monetization-iap— StoreKit / Play Billing / RevenueCat (not Stripe/web)complete-everything— close audited gaps to done with verification (human-reviewed for payment code)
Further reading
- Payment correctness matrix A1–G4
- Per-control detection commands and signals
- Prioritized report template
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.

