agentleFS
Sign inStart free
rm2thaddeusrm2thaddeus/Aitor_Skills/code-auditor/SKILL.md

code-auditor

Skill4 starsChanged 10 months agoMITView on GitHub

Performs comprehensive codebase analysis covering architecture, code quality, security, performance, testing, and maintainability. Use when user wants to audit code quality, identify technical debt, find security issues, assess test coverage, or get a codebase health check.

7 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Test quality and effectiveness

    line 52
  2. Distinctive:

    Run static analysis tools: if available

    line 69
  3. Distinctive:

    Bash: Run linters, coverage tools

    line 119

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

Code Auditor

Comprehensive codebase analysis covering architecture, code quality, security, performance, testing, and maintainability.

When to Use

  • "audit the code"
  • "analyze code quality"
  • "check for issues"
  • "review the codebase"
  • "find technical debt"
  • "security audit"
  • "performance review"

What It Analyzes

1. Architecture & Design

  • Overall structure and organization
  • Design patterns in use
  • Module boundaries and separation of concerns
  • Dependency management
  • Architectural decisions and trade-offs

2. Code Quality

  • Complexity hotspots (cyclomatic complexity)
  • Code duplication (DRY violations)
  • Naming conventions and consistency
  • Documentation coverage
  • Code smells and anti-patterns

3. Security

  • Common vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10)
  • Input validation and sanitization
  • Authentication and authorization
  • Secrets management
  • Dependency vulnerabilities

4. Performance

  • Algorithmic complexity issues
  • Database query optimization
  • Memory usage patterns
  • Caching opportunities
  • Resource leaks

5. Testing

  • Test coverage assessment
  • Test quality and effectiveness
  • Missing test scenarios
  • Testing patterns and practices
  • Integration vs unit test balance

6. Maintainability

  • Technical debt assessment
  • Coupling and cohesion
  • Ease of future changes
  • Onboarding friendliness
  • Documentation quality

Approach

  1. Explore using Explore agent (thorough mode)
  2. Identify patterns with Grep and Glob
  3. Read critical files for detailed analysis
  4. Run static analysis tools if available
  5. Synthesize findings into actionable report

Thoroughness Levels

  • Quick (15-30 min): High-level, critical issues only
  • Standard (30-60 min): Comprehensive across all dimensions
  • Deep (60+ min): Exhaustive with detailed examples

Output Format

# Code Audit Report

## Executive Summary
- Overall health score
- Critical issues count
- Top 3 priorities

## Findings by Category

### Architecture & Design
#### 🔴 High Priority
- [Finding with file:line reference]
  - Impact: [description]
  - Recommendation: [action]

#### 🟡 Medium Priority
...

### [Other categories]

## Prioritized Action Plan
1. Quick wins (< 1 day)
2. Medium-term improvements (1-5 days)
3. Long-term initiatives (> 5 days)

## Metrics
- Files analyzed: X
- Lines of code: Y
- Test coverage: Z%
- Complexity hotspots: N

Tools Used

  • Task (Explore agent): Thorough codebase exploration
  • Grep: Pattern matching for issues
  • Glob: Find files by type/pattern
  • Read: Detailed file analysis
  • Bash: Run linters, coverage tools

Success Criteria

  • Comprehensive coverage of all six dimensions
  • Specific file:line references for all findings
  • Severity/priority ratings (Critical/High/Medium/Low)
  • Actionable recommendations (not just observations)
  • Estimated effort for fixes
  • Both quick wins and long-term improvements

Integration

  • feature-planning: Plan technical debt reduction
  • test-fixing: Address test gaps identified
  • project-bootstrapper: Set up quality tooling

Configuration

Can focus on specific areas:

  • Security-only audit
  • Performance-only audit
  • Testing-only assessment
  • Quick architecture review

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