Audit Skill

Skill Auditor

Evaluates any Claude Code skill against a quality rubric, checks for conflicts with other installed skills, and provides actionable recommendations.

Skill Governance > Audit Skill

Invoke This Skill When

• User says /audit-skill <name> or asks to "audit", "review", "evaluate", or "score" a skill
• User is considering adopting an external or open-source skill
• User just finished writing or modifying a skill and wants quality feedback
• User notices unexpected skill triggering or conflicts between skills

Input

The argument is either:

• A skill name (e.g., acme-app-ops) — looked up in the skills index
• A file path to a SKILL.md (e.g., ~/Downloads/some-skill/SKILL.md) — read directly

Workflow

Step 1: Load the Target Skill

• If given a name: read skills-index.md at the root of your skills repo (generated by /index-skills full) to find the skill's file path, then read that SKILL.md
• If given a path: read the SKILL.md directly
• Also read any files in a references/ subdirectory if one exists alongside the SKILL.md
• If the skill cannot be found, tell the user and suggest running /index-skills full first

Step 2: Load the Skills Index

• Read skills-index.md at the root of your skills repo
• Extract all skill names, descriptions, and trigger conditions for conflict checking
• If the index doesn't exist or is empty, warn the user and skip conflict checking

Step 3: Score Against the Quality Rubric

Read the rubric at references/quality-rubric.md (relative to THIS skill's directory).

Evaluate the target skill against each dimension independently. Be honest and specific — vague praise is useless. Cite specific lines from the skill that support your score.

Step 4: Check for Conflicts

Compare the target skill's description and trigger conditions against every other skill in the index:

• Keyword overlap: Do two descriptions share the same action verbs AND domain nouns?
• Subset triggers: Is one skill's trigger condition a subset of another's?
• Ambiguous routing: Could a reasonable user query trigger both skills?

Rate each potential conflict:

• NONE — No meaningful overlap
• LOW — Minor overlap, but context/domain makes disambiguation trivial
• MEDIUM — Overlap exists and could cause mis-routing on ambiguous queries
• HIGH — Skills will frequently compete for the same query

Step 5: Assess Provenance (for external skills only)

If the skill was provided as a file path (not from the index), also evaluate:

• Does the skill reference specific tools or APIs that exist?
• Is the instruction style precise (step-by-step) or vague (aspirational)?
• Are there signs it was tested in production vs. written speculatively?
• Does it make assumptions about the environment that may not hold?

Step 6: Output the Audit Report

Format the report as follows:

# Skill Audit: [skill-name]

**Source:** [file path]
**Version:** [from frontmatter, or "unversioned"]
**Type:** [router/leaf] | **Hidden:** [yes/no] | **Slash command:** [/cmd or none]

## Scores

| Dimension | Score | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Trigger Crispness | A/B/C/D | [one-line explanation] |
| Scope Discipline | A/B/C/D | [one-line explanation] |
| Description Quality | A/B/C/D | [one-line explanation] |
| Instruction Clarity | A/B/C/D | [one-line explanation] |
| Tool Permissions | A/B/C/D | [one-line explanation] |
| Conflict Potential | NONE/LOW/MED/HIGH | [one-line explanation] |

**Overall: [A/B/C/D]**

## Detailed Findings

### Trigger Crispness
[2-4 sentences. What triggers it, what shouldn't trigger it, any false positive risk.]

### Scope Discipline
[2-4 sentences. How many distinct tasks does it handle? Could any be split out?]

### Description Quality
[2-4 sentences. Is it concise? Action-oriented? Specific enough for the model to route correctly?]

### Instruction Clarity
[2-4 sentences. Could an LLM follow the instructions unambiguously? Missing steps?]

### Tool Permissions
[2-4 sentences. Are allowed-tools specified? Minimal or overly broad?]

## Conflicts Detected

[Table of conflicts, or "No conflicts detected with N indexed skills."]

| Conflicting Skill | Overlap | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| skill-name | "Both trigger on X" | LOW/MED/HIGH |

## Recommendations

[Numbered, actionable items. Focus on the lowest-scoring dimensions. Each recommendation should be specific enough to implement directly.]

1. [Specific recommendation]
2. [Specific recommendation]
...

Scoring Guidelines

When in doubt, refer to the full rubric at references/quality-rubric.md. Key principles:

• A = production-quality, no changes needed
• B = good with minor improvements possible
• C = functional but needs work before scaling
• D = needs significant revision

Be calibrated: most well-intentioned skills should land at B or C. Reserve A for genuinely tight, battle-tested skills. Reserve D for skills that are broken or harmful.