Integration Audit

Use this skill to audit an attempted Steerable integration. It is report-only: do not retrofit or auto-fix unless the user separately asks for fixes. Report-only governs the target's source. It does not make this a static audit: the audit drives the running target under references/live-pass.md, and no conformance claim may be reported without that live pass.

Canonical Inputs

Load these before auditing:

1. The user's work order and requested target/scope.
2. docs/spec/conformance-checklist.md from the Steerable repo. This is the only source of SA-CONF audit truth.
3. The How to recognize it sections in docs/anti-patterns/*.md.
4. docs/guides/retrofit-existing-app.md when present. If missing, cite the path as future locate guidance and use the minimal locate procedure below.

Do not restate or extend checklist rules. Execute every applicable SA-CONF item from the checklist and cite item IDs plus requirement IDs from the checklist row. Anti-pattern sweep findings cite the anti-pattern file and section, plus the mapped SA-CONF item(s).

Workflow

1. Define the audit target.
   • Record target path, claimed conformance level if any, product area, and exclusions the user gave.
   • If no Steerable integration attempt is present, stop. Report scope_guard: no_integration_present and route the user to skills/retrofit/ and docs/guides/retrofit-existing-app.md.
   • If the codebase is too large to sweep honestly, continue only with an explicit partial-coverage declaration before item results. Name included paths, excluded paths, search limits, and the confidence impact.
2. Locate the integration.
   • Prefer docs/guides/retrofit-existing-app.md for inventory tactics when it exists.
   • Minimal locate procedure: find the registry first, then walk outward to declarations, policy resolution, executors, facts/read tools, surfaces, router/model bridge, ledger/undo, generated artifacts, and any external bridge.
   • Build an integration map with file paths and line references for each seam. Missing seams are evidence, not assumptions.
3. Generate the item skeleton.

   • Optional helper from the Steerable repo root:

     node skills/integration-audit/scripts/make-report-skeleton.mjs --target <target-path> > /tmp/steerable-audit.md

   • The skeleton must contain SA-CONF-001 through SA-CONF-089. Fill every item with one checklist result token from the canonical result vocabulary.
4. Run the live pass.
   • Read references/live-pass.md and execute LP-1 through LP-5 against the running target before item execution, so their artifacts are available as item evidence.
   • Drive the target through the channel its nature calls for. The five observations are fixed; the probe is not.
   • Record every check as Pass, Fail, Not applicable with a structural justification, or Inconclusive with a blocker. Each result carries an artifact that is a record of the run, not a claim about the code.
   • A conformance claim requires a completed live pass. If the target cannot be driven, that is Inconclusive, which the checklist's result vocabulary already says "does not count as pass for a conformance claim". Report it plainly; an honest Inconclusive is a correct outcome and a green test suite, eval run, or build is not a substitute for any of these checks.
5. Execute the checklist.
   • For each SA-CONF row, use the checklist row's How to look instructions from docs/spec/conformance-checklist.md.
   • Record Pass, Fail, Flag, Not applicable, Pending spec clarification, or Inconclusive.
   • A MUST item failure is a blocker for the relevant claimed conformance level. A SHOULD item failure is a flag. Pending and inconclusive items never count as a pass for a conformance claim.
   • For items in the references/live-pass.md item-binding table, static evidence alone cannot produce Pass while the mapped LP check is not Pass; record Inconclusive.
   • Ceremony failures and unsafe-magic failures are both real findings when their SA-CONF item is violated. Do not down-rank over-gating because it looks cautious.
6. Run the anti-pattern sweep.
   • Read references/anti-pattern-sweep.md.
   • For each listed anti-pattern document, execute its How to recognize it section against the target.
   • Convert confirmed evidence into findings using the report format. If the sweep produces only a suspicion, report it as uncertain rather than dropping it or asserting it.
7. Write the findings report.
   • Use references/report-format.md.
   • Include the live pass record before the item table, and an item-result table for every SA-CONF-001 through SA-CONF-089 item.
   • Severity-rank findings before the full item table.
   • Every finding must include evidence as file/line/behavior and a fix direction concrete enough that a second agent can act without re-auditing from scratch.
8. Verify the report.
   • Confirm all 95 checklist items have a result.
   • Confirm LP-1 through LP-5 each have a result, and that every Pass carries an artifact recording what was observed rather than an assertion that the code is correct.
   • Confirm every Not applicable live-pass check names the structural absence that justifies it, and every Inconclusive one names its blocker, what was attempted, and what would unblock it.
   • Confirm no conformance claim is reported as passing while any live-pass check is Fail or Inconclusive.
   • Confirm every finding cites at least one SA-CONF item or an anti-pattern section plus mapped SA-CONF item.
   • Confirm uncertain findings are labeled certainty: uncertain.
   • Confirm partial coverage is either none or explicitly declared with exclusions.
   • Confirm no checklist or anti-pattern rule text was copied into the report beyond IDs, short labels, paths, and evidence.

Supporting References

• Live pass gate: references/live-pass.md
• Procedure details: references/procedure.md
• Report contract: references/report-format.md
• Anti-pattern sweep routing: references/anti-pattern-sweep.md