Results for “audit-findings”

Launches four parallel read-only sub-agents to review a git diff or file scope for regressions, security risks, performance issues, and contract gaps, then aggregates findings into a prioritized fix path.

Runs a budget-aware agent-assisted engineering health audit for instruction/config drift, hooks/MCP, verifier surfaces, and AI maintainability. Use when users ask in any language to audit Claude, Codex, Pi, agent instructions, MCP or hooks, verifier coverage, or AI-maintainability drift. Not for debugging application code or reviewing PRs.

Audit datasets for structure, missingness, labeling, suspicious values, duplicate identifiers, and documentation readiness. Use when a researcher asks for data QA, codebook review, sanity checks, or pre-analysis cleanup guidance.

Read-only diagnostic that scans Claude Code session transcripts to surface which MCP servers and tools you actually use, ranked by call frequency, with zero-use servers flagged for removal. Use when planning an MCP cleanup, evaluating whether to keep a newly-added server, deciding which servers warrant token cost in the catalog, or before authoring an MCP-removal PR. Outputs a markdown report (last N days) — does not modify any settings. Pair with the manual `claude mcp remove <name>` step once findings are reviewed.

Applies Han's shared Human-Readable Output Standard to a target you already have — a file on disk, text pasted into the prompt, or a draft already produced in the conversation — by dispatching the readability-editor to rewrite its prose so the main point comes first, headings are descriptive, each paragraph carries one idea, and sentences stay short and active, while preserving every fact. Use when you want to make a document or draft readable, edit or polish prose for readability, clean up writing, tighten wording, or re-apply the readability standard to something already written. Rewrites prose only, leaving code, diagrams, and citation identifiers unchanged. Does not write new feature or system documentation — use project-documentation. Does not restructure code or review it — use refactor to restructure code and code-review to audit it. Does not judge the underlying work or raise findings; it only rewrites the writing.