Audit Career Evidence

Assess whether a project story can be defended in a resume or interview. Default to a read-only report; edit Chronicle files only when the user asks to apply the audit.

Scope

Resolve the requested project under <vault>/chronicle/projects/<project-id>/. Read PROJECT.md, TIMELINE.md, OWNERSHIP.md, DECISIONS.md, EVIDENCE.md, STAR.md, and their referenced session records when present.

Let <plugin-root> be ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT} when Claude Code supplies it; otherwise use the directory two levels above this SKILL.md. Read <plugin-root>/docs/DATA_MODEL.ko.md when a label or evidence rule is unclear.

Audit Each Claim

Classify every career-relevant claim:

• confirmed: direct evidence supports both the action and the attributed ownership or result;
• inferred: context supports the claim, but a key link is indirect;
• needs-evidence: a metric, outcome, ownership statement, or causal claim lacks defensible support.

Check:

1. Evidence reference exists and points to the claimed fact.
2. Result claims distinguish observed change from assumed causation.
3. Metrics include unit, baseline, comparison, population, and measurement method when those details matter.
4. Personal ownership is distinct from team output.
5. Decision claims include the actual constraints, alternatives, and trade-offs.
6. Project files and session records do not contradict each other.
7. The claim is still current or clearly dated.
8. Public wording does not expose secrets, customer data, internal URLs, unreleased plans, or confidential scale figures.
9. Resume language does not strengthen the source claim through words such as “led,” “designed,” “owned,” “eliminated,” or “improved” without support.

Never upgrade a claim because it sounds plausible. Never invent a replacement number.

Produce the Report

Group findings by severity:

• Blocker: unsafe to publish or materially misleading;
• Needs review: important ambiguity in ownership, result, or consistency;
• Evidence opportunity: useful evidence could be recovered;
• Ready: sufficiently supported for the intended use.

For each non-ready claim, provide:

• the exact claim or a short identifying excerpt;
• current and recommended state;
• the gap;
• the smallest useful next action;
• likely evidence sources, without claiming they exist.

End with a compact readiness summary:

confirmed N / reviewed M / audited T
blockers B / needs review R / evidence opportunities E

Do not call the audit complete if files or referenced sessions could not be read.

Apply Only on Request

If the user asks to apply findings, make targeted edits:

• preserve original wording when adding a state label is enough;
• append missing-evidence tasks to EVIDENCE.md;
• record conflicts rather than deleting one side;
• add user-confirmed:<date> only after explicit confirmation;
• keep the project or session captured until critical review is complete.