Audit Plugin

Audit Plugin

Project: !basename $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null) 2>/dev/null || basename $PWD Branch: !git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown"

Reviews the Claude Code addon in the current project (plugin, skill, sub-agent, or a combination) against official Claude Code best practices. Generates actionable GitHub issues and a prioritised fix plan.

Step 0: Pre-flight check

gh auth status 2>&1 || { echo "ERROR: gh is not authenticated. Run: gh auth login"; exit 1; }

Step 1: Identify what kind of addon this project defines

Scan for known Claude Code addon files:

find . -not -path './.git/*' \( \
  -name 'plugin.json' -path '*/.claude-plugin/*' \
  -o -name 'SKILL.md' -path '*/skills/*' \
  -o -name '*.md' -path '*/agents/*' \
\) 2>/dev/null

Read each file found. Build a mental model of:

• Plugin manifest (.claude-plugin/plugin.json) — name, version, declared agents/skills
• Skills (skills/<name>/SKILL.md) — frontmatter fields, body structure, tool declarations
• Agents (agents/<name>.md) — frontmatter fields, description examples, tool restrictions

Step 2: Fetch current best-practice documentation

Use WebFetch to retrieve up-to-date guidance from these known URLs:

• Skills: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/skills
• Sub-agents: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/agents
• Plugins: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/plugins

If any URL returns an error, use WebSearch to find the current equivalent under code.claude.com. Summarise the key quality criteria from each source.

Step 3: Evaluate against best practices

For plugin.json, check:

• Required fields present: name, version, description, author, license
• minVersion set to a current compatible value
• Keywords are relevant and searchable
• description is concise and accurate

For each SKILL.md, check:

• description is a single unbroken line under 1,536 characters (combined with when_to_use)
• allowed-tools is set and follows least-privilege (only tools the skill actually needs)
• Body is under 500 lines; large reference content moved to separate files
• Shell injection blocks (!`command`) are used where live context would help
• Step numbering is clear and actionable
• Code blocks specify a language
• Prose lines are ≤ 120 characters
• No personalised language in formal content (no "you", "your" in instructions)

For each agent .md, check:

• description is a quoted single-line string with proper <example> blocks for auto-delegation
• model, color, maxTurns, memory, tools and initialPrompt fields are present where appropriate
• Agent body is clear, focused, and actionable
• Description examples use current delegation language (no "Task tool" narration)
• tools list follows least-privilege

Step 4: Generate GitHub issues

For each distinct finding, create a GitHub issue:

gh issue create \
  --title "<type>: <brief description>" \
  --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Finding

<description of the problem>

## Expected

<what best practice requires>

## Current

<what the file actually has>

## Suggested fix

<concrete change to make>
EOF
)" \
  --label "enhancement"

Group closely related findings into a single issue where it makes sense. Use --label "bug" for broken or non-compliant fields, --label "enhancement" for improvements.

Record each issue number for reference in the next step.

Step 5: Write prioritised fix plan to CLAUDE.md

Append or update a section in the project CLAUDE.md under the heading ## Audit Findings — <today's date>:

## Audit Findings — YYYY-MM-DD

Issues generated from `/audit-plugin` review. Suggested fix order:

### Group 1 — Correctness (fix first)

- #N: <title>
- #N: <title>

### Group 2 — Best-Practice Compliance

- #N: <title>
- #N: <title>

### Group 3 — Quality Improvements

- #N: <title>
- #N: <title>

Order groups by: correctness blockers first, then compliance, then polish.

Step 6: Report summary

Output a brief summary:

• Total issues created (with links)
• Top-priority fix
• Link to the CLAUDE.md section added