agentleFS
Sign inStart free
patmeh1patmeh1/product-docs-kit/.claude/skills/stack-audit/SKILL.md

stack-audit

Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Audit the technology stack for outdated dependencies, end-of-life runtimes, security vulnerabilities, unused packages, licence risks, and undocumented environment variables, then produce a sequenced upgrade plan. Use quarterly, when the monthly stack-check workflow opens an issue, or when the user asks "what needs upgrading", "is anything out of date", "what am I running", or "is my stack safe".

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions2 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 2

    1. VECTORG99/acf★ 2same name
    2. truemetal74/skills★ 0same name

    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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 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.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Read docs/12-tech-stack.md and docs/04-architecture.md, then the full procedure in prompts/07-stack-upgrade-audit.md.

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    Report only. Do not upgrade anything: Not a single version bump.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    The lockfile is the truth; the manifest is only the intent: Read both, and flag disagreements.

    line 24
  4. Very specific:

    Say when you cannot verify: If you cannot determine a latest version or an EOL date, mark it [NEEDS VERIFICATION].

    line 29
  5. Distinctive:

    Enforce one technology per pull request: If two genuinely must ship together, say so and explain why they cannot be separated.

    line 67

≈ “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

Technology Stack & Upgrade Audit

Answer: what am I actually running, is any of it out of date or unsafe, and what should change next?

Before you start

Read docs/12-tech-stack.md and docs/04-architecture.md, then the full procedure in prompts/07-stack-upgrade-audit.md.

The .github/workflows/stack-check.yml Action catches the obvious cases monthly. This skill supplies the judgement it cannot: what is worth upgrading, in what order, and at what risk.

Rules

Report only. Do not upgrade anything. Not a single version bump.

The lockfile is the truth; the manifest is only the intent. Read both, and flag disagreements.

Cite evidence for every version claim — the file it came from.

Say when you cannot verify. If you cannot determine a latest version or an EOL date, mark it [NEEDS VERIFICATION]. A confidently wrong EOL date is worse than an admitted gap.

Do not recommend change for its own sake. "Newer" is not a reason. Every recommendation needs a concrete trigger: security, EOL, a blocked feature, a measured performance problem, or cost.

Six audits

  1. What is actually installed — versions from the lockfile and runtime pins, compared against the TECH- register. Flag every mismatch: a stack document that disagrees with the lockfile is actively harmful.
  2. Currency and support status — versions behind, EOL dates, packages whose maintainer has stopped publishing
  3. Security — vulnerabilities by severity, and crucially reachability: a critical CVE in a build-time tool is not the same as one in a request handler
  4. Dependency hygiene — unused, duplicated, superseded by a platform feature, or trivially replaceable
  5. Configuration integrity — env vars missing from the CFG- registry, dead CFG- entries, and any secret behind a browser-exposed prefix (treat as Critical)
  6. Reproducibility and lock-in — could someone clone this today and build it? What would leaving each platform actually cost?

Output

  1. Executive summary — three sentences. Is the stack healthy and safe? What is most urgent? Is anything actively unsupported right now?
  2. Findings register with severity and evidence
  3. Proposed upgrade backlog — ready-to-paste UPG- rows for docs/12-tech-stack.md §7
  4. Sequenced upgrade plan — for each step: what, why this position in the sequence, what must move with it, what will likely break, how to verify beyond "it builds", and how to roll back
  5. Explicitly not recommended — and why. This stops the same question being re-asked every quarter.
  6. Document corrections needed — list them; do not apply them

Enforce one technology per pull request. If two genuinely must ship together, say so and explain why they cannot be separated.

Prioritise: 🔴 Security → 🔴 EOL → 🟠 Dated deprecation → 🟡 Majors behind → ⚪ Everything else.

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.

Check your setup, free