# harness-audit > Harness Audit - Skill: `intense-visions/harness-audit` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 2 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add intense-visions/harness-audit` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/intense-visions/harness-audit/raw - Safety review: pending (external: skillspector PASS) - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Security - Author: Intense-Visions (https://skillmd.com/u/intense-visions) - Updated: 2026-08-19 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/intense-visions/harness-audit --- # Harness Audit > Cross-dimensional codebase audit orchestrator — classify the repo's shape, fan out parallel read-only audit agents that compose existing harness skills, adversarially confirm high-severity findings, dedup against the existing issue tracker, and publish grouped thematic tracking issues with checkbox action lists. Optionally hand off to worktree-isolated fix agents, one per theme, gated on human confirmation. Motivated by repeated manual audits of downstream overlay repos: a full sweep surfaced things no single skill did — a CI security gate silently dead for weeks behind a stale path filter, the highest-blast-radius tools entirely untested, and rename residue that had turned an architecture-enforcement layer into a no-op. The pattern (fan out → verify → dedup → group → optionally fix) proved repeatable and is codified here. ## When to Use - Periodic deep hygiene sweep of a repo you maintain (quarterly, pre-release, taking over a codebase) - After a large migration, rename, or restructuring, when cross-cutting residue is likely - When onboarding to an unfamiliar repo and you want a ranked map of what is actually broken - When individual skills (`harness-code-review`, `harness-security-scan`, `harness-docs-pipeline`) keep finding local issues but nobody has the cross-dimensional picture - NOT for reviewing a single PR or diff — use `harness-code-review` - NOT for a single-concern check (security only, docs only) — invoke that skill directly; the orchestrator's value is corroboration across dimensions - NOT as an always-on CI gate — this is the on-demand deep sweep; per-PR slices belong to the individual pipelines - NOT when the working tree is dirty or tests are failing for known in-progress reasons — audit a clean checkpoint, or the noise floor swamps the findings ## Flags | Flag | Effect | | --------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | `--dimensions` | Run only the named dimensions (e.g. `security,docs,tests`) | | `--report-only` | Emit a single ranked report; do not file issues | | `--fix` | Offer the remediation fan-out after publishing (still confirmed per theme) | | `--max-agents` | Cap concurrent audit agents (default scales to repo size, 3–7) | | `--ci` | Non-interactive: report-only output, no issue filing, no remediation | ## Process ### Iron Law **Audit phases observe. Only the gated remediation phase changes anything.** Every agent dispatched in Phases 1–5 is read-only: no file writes, no commits, no issue edits, no config changes. An auditor who fixes what it finds has destroyed the evidence and skipped the dedup, grouping, and prioritization that make the audit useful. The only phase that modifies the repo is Phase 6, and it never starts without explicit human confirmation per theme. ``` Phase 1: CLASSIFY --> Phase 2: FAN-OUT --> Phase 3: VERIFY | v Phase 6: REMEDIATE (opt) <-- Phase 5: PUBLISH <-- Phase 4: DEDUP+RANK ``` | Phase | Purpose | Exit Condition | | ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------ | | 1. CLASSIFY | Determine repo shape; select applicable dimensions | Dimension roster recorded with per-dimension rationale | | 2. FAN-OUT | Parallel read-only audit agents, one per dimension | All agents return `AuditFinding[]` | | 3. VERIFY | Adversarial confirmation of HIGH findings by a second agent | Every HIGH finding confirmed, downgraded, or discarded | | 4. DEDUP+RANK | Merge duplicates, severity-rank, cross-check issue tracker | Deduplicated list with corroboration and tracker links | | 5. PUBLISH | Grouped thematic tracking issues (or ranked report) | Issues filed / report delivered | | 6. REMEDIATE | Optional fix fan-out, one worktree-isolated agent per theme | Only runs per-theme after explicit human confirmation | ### Phase 1: CLASSIFY — Repo Shape Gates the Dimensions 1. **Classify the repo shape** before dispatching anything: `app`, `library`, `CLI-toolset`, `skills-overlay`, `docs-site`, or `monorepo` (which is classified per workspace package). Read the manifest(s), directory layout, and CI workflows to decide. 2. **Select dimensions by shape.** Graph/entropy/architecture analyzers produce pure noise on a non-app repo — an audit must not run them blindly. Candidate dimensions: | Dimension | Composes | Skip when | | ---------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------- | | Structure / arch conformance | `harness-dependency-health`, `enforce-architecture`, `harness-hotspot-detector` | Repo has no source graph (docs/skills overlay) | | Code quality / bugs | `harness-code-review` (repo-scoped), `cleanup-dead-code` | No executable source | | Docs drift | `detect-doc-drift`, `validate-context-engineering` | Never — every repo has docs to drift | | CI / workflow hygiene | Direct inspection of `.github/workflows/` (or a workflow-audit skill if one is present) | No CI configured (that IS a finding) | | Security posture | `harness-security-scan`, `security-craft`, `harness-supply-chain-audit` | Never | | Test depth | `harness-test-advisor`, `test-craft` (JS/TS) or the repo's test-intelligence skills (other languages) | No test surface exists (that IS a finding) | | UX / onboarding friction | Fresh-eyes walkthrough of README, setup docs, first-run experience | Internal single-maintainer tooling | 3. **Scale agent count to repo size.** Small repo (under roughly 5K LOC, or overlay-shaped): merge related dimensions into 3 agents. Medium: 4–5. Large app or monorepo: full roster up to `--max-agents`. Record the roster and the skip rationale for every excluded dimension. 4. **Build the exclusion list.** Generated files, lockfiles, vendored code, ledger/baseline files (coverage baselines, security ledgers, snapshot fixtures), and build output are out of scope for every dimension. Findings inside them are almost always false positives against machine-written content. Record the glob list now and pass it to every agent. ### Phase 2: FAN-OUT — Parallel Read-Only Audit Agents 1. **Dispatch one agent per dimension, in parallel.** Each agent receives: the dimension charter, the exclusion list, the repo-shape classification, and the instruction to **compose the existing skill for its dimension rather than re-derive its logic**. The security agent runs `harness-security-scan` and reads its output; it does not reinvent secret-detection regexes. 2. **Search prose, not just code.** Each agent greps PR descriptions, issue text, commit messages, and docs — not only diffs and source. Dead CI gates, contradicted decisions, and abandoned migrations are usually visible in prose long before they are visible in code (`gh pr list --search`, `gh issue list --search`, `git log --grep`). 3. **Require evidence per finding.** Every finding returns as: ``` AuditFinding { id, dimension, severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW, file/lineRange (or workflow/issue/PR reference), evidence, // the exact observation, quotable reproduction, // how a second agent can confirm it suggestedAction, // one checkbox-sized action ownerRepo, // when the audit spans repos, which repo owns the fix } ``` A finding without reproduction steps is an opinion, not a finding. Agents must not write files, post comments, or open issues — findings come back in-band. 4. **Collect all agents before proceeding.** A dimension agent that errors is retried once; if it fails again, record the dimension as UNAUDITED in the final report rather than silently narrowing scope. ### Phase 3: VERIFY — Adversarial Confirmation of HIGH Findings 1. **Verify, don't trust.** For every HIGH finding, dispatch a second agent whose charter is to **disprove** it: reproduce the evidence independently, check whether the "dead gate" actually fires on some other path, whether the "untested module" is covered by an integration suite the first agent missed, whether the "secret" is a documented placeholder. 2. **Each HIGH finding exits this phase as** confirmed (second agent reproduced it), downgraded (real but overstated), or discarded (not reproducible — record why, so the false-positive pattern feeds back into the dimension charter). 3. **Spot-check MEDIUMs.** Sample at least 20% of MEDIUM findings with the same adversarial pass. If more than a third of the sample fails confirmation, verify all MEDIUMs before proceeding — the dimension agent was hallucination-prone. ### Phase 4: DEDUP + RANK — One Truth Per Problem 1. **Merge cross-dimension duplicates.** The same root cause frequently surfaces in multiple dimensions (a stale path filter appears as CI hygiene AND security posture). Merge into one finding, keep both evidence trails, and mark it **corroborated** — a finding two dimensions hit independently is high-confidence and ranks above its severity peers. 2. **Cross-check the issue tracker.** Run `gh issue list --state open` (and `--state closed --search` for recently closed) and match findings against existing issues by symptom, file, and keyword — search issue _text_, not just titles. A finding already tracked is annotated with the issue reference and **excluded from filing**; a finding matching a recently _closed_ issue is flagged as a possible regression instead. 3. **Severity-rank the survivors:** confirmed-corroborated HIGH first, then confirmed HIGH, then MEDIUM by blast radius (use `harness impact-preview` / hotspot data where available), then LOW. LOW findings that share a theme with higher findings ride along in that theme; orphan LOWs go into a single hygiene bucket. ### Phase 5: PUBLISH — Grouped Thematic Tracking Issues 1. **Group findings into themes**, not per-finding issues. A theme is a coherent unit of remediation work (e.g. "CI workflow hygiene", "test coverage for high-blast-radius tools", "rename residue"). Target 3–7 themes; 30 single-finding issues is spam, one mega-issue is unactionable. 2. **File one tracking issue per theme** (skip when `--report-only` or `--ci`; emit the ranked report instead). Each issue contains: - A one-paragraph theme summary with severity and corroboration - A **checkbox list** (`- [ ]`) of concrete actions, one per finding, each with a file/line or workflow reference and an evidence link - **Owner-repo attribution** when findings span repos: file the issue in the repo that owns the fix, or clearly label per-checkbox which repo owns each action - Cross-references to the existing issues found in Phase 4 rather than restating them 3. **Emit the audit report**: dimension roster (including skipped and UNAUDITED dimensions with rationale), finding counts by severity before/after verification, dedup statistics, and links to the filed issues. ### Phase 6: REMEDIATE (Optional) — Gated Fix Fan-Out 1. **Only with `--fix`, and only per theme after explicit human confirmation.** Present the themes; the human picks which (if any) to dispatch. No confirmation, no remediation — silence is a "no". 2. **One worktree-isolated fix agent per confirmed theme.** Each agent works on a branch in its own worktree, addresses its theme's checkboxes, runs the repo's full gates, and opens a PR that references (and where complete, closes) its tracking issue. 3. **Fix agents are ordinary contributors**: conventional commits, no gate bypasses, PR review flow. The audit orchestrator does not merge. ## Harness Integration - **`harness skill run harness-audit`** — Run the full audit pipeline. - **`harness skill run harness-code-review`** — Composed by the code-quality dimension. - **`harness check-security` / `harness skill run security-craft`** — Composed by the security dimension. - **`harness skill run detect-doc-drift`** — Composed by the docs dimension. - **`harness check-deps` / `harness skill run harness-dependency-health`** — Composed by the structure dimension (app-shaped repos only). - **`harness skill run harness-test-advisor`** — Composed by the test-depth dimension. - **`harness impact-preview`** — Blast-radius input for severity ranking in Phase 4. ## Success Criteria - Repo shape classified and every skipped dimension has a recorded rationale - All dispatched audit agents completed (or are listed as UNAUDITED — never silently dropped) - Zero HIGH findings published without a second-agent confirmation verdict - No published finding references a generated, vendored, or ledger file from the exclusion list - No filed issue duplicates an existing open issue; regressions of closed issues are labeled as such - Themes number between 3 and 7 (plus at most one hygiene bucket), each with a checkbox action list and owner-repo attribution where relevant - Nothing in the repo changed unless Phase 6 ran with explicit per-theme confirmation ## Gates - **Read-only until Phase 6.** Any file write, commit, issue edit, or config change during Phases 1–5 = audit invalid. Stop, revert, restart the affected phase. - **No fan-out without classification.** Dispatching dimension agents before the repo-shape roster exists = noise. Phase 1 output is a prerequisite for Phase 2. - **No publishing unverified HIGHs.** A HIGH finding that skipped Phase 3 must not appear in any issue or report. If verification cannot run, downgrade to MEDIUM and say why. - **No filing without the tracker cross-check.** If `gh issue list` is unavailable (no network, no auth), fall back to `--report-only` — never file blind. - **No remediation without explicit confirmation.** `--fix` enables the _offer_; each theme's fix agent starts only on an explicit human yes for that theme. ## Escalation - **When two dimensions return contradictory findings** (e.g. "this module is dead code" vs "this module is the highest-blast-radius untested path"): do not average them. Report both with evidence and let the human adjudicate — contradiction usually means the repo classification or exclusion list is wrong. - **When the tracker cross-check finds a recently closed issue matching a live finding:** flag as a possible regression, link the closing PR, and escalate to the human before filing — re-filing a fixed-and-regressed issue as "new" loses the history. - **When more than a third of sampled findings fail adversarial verification:** the dimension agent is unreliable. Report the dimension as UNAUDITED with the failure pattern rather than publishing its remainder unverified. - **When the audit spans repos and fix ownership is ambiguous:** file nothing across the boundary; present the ownership question to the human with the evidence from both repos. ## Rationalizations to Reject | Rationalization | Reality | | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | "The security scan passed last month, skip that dimension" | A passing scan proves the scan ran, not that it still runs. A dead CI gate behind a stale path filter looks exactly like a passing gate. Audit the gate itself. | | "This finding is obvious, it doesn't need adversarial confirmation" | The most confident findings are where hallucinated file paths and misread configs hide. HIGH means high stakes for being wrong — confirmation is the price. | | "I'll fix this one-liner while I'm in here, it's faster than filing it" | Audit phases observe. A fixed finding never reaches dedup, never gets corroborated, and silently narrows the audit. File it; fix it in Phase 6 if confirmed. | | "Filing one issue per finding is more precise than grouping" | Thirty single-finding issues get bulk-closed unread. Themes with checkbox lists are how findings survive contact with a maintainer's queue. | | "The diff is clean, so the repo is healthy" | Diffs show what changed; audits exist for what silently stopped working. Grep PR text, issue text, and workflow runs — prose leaks problems that code review missed. | | "These generated files have findings too, more coverage is better" | Findings against lockfiles, baselines, and ledgers are noise that buries the real signal and trains humans to ignore the audit. Exclusion lists exist for a reason. | | "Nobody replied about remediation, proceed with the fixes" | Silence is not confirmation. Phase 6 is opt-in per theme, every time. | ## Examples ### Example: Auditing a medium-sized CLI toolset ``` $ harness skill run harness-audit Phase 1: CLASSIFY Shape: CLI-toolset (bin entries, no served app). ~22K LOC TypeScript. Roster (5 agents): code-quality, security, docs, ci-hygiene, test-depth. Skipped: structure/arch (no layered app graph — noise on toolsets), ux-onboarding (merged into docs — single-audience internal tool). Exclusions: dist/**, pnpm-lock.yaml, coverage-baselines.json, **/__snapshots__/** Phase 2: FAN-OUT (parallel) code-quality -> 9 findings (composed harness-code-review, repo scope) security -> 3 findings (composed harness-security-scan + supply-chain-audit) docs -> 6 findings (composed detect-doc-drift) ci-hygiene -> 4 findings (inspected .github/workflows + gh run list) test-depth -> 5 findings (composed harness-test-advisor + harness impact-preview) Phase 3: VERIFY 4 HIGH findings -> 3 confirmed, 1 discarded (the "hardcoded token" is a documented placeholder; charter updated). Phase 4: DEDUP+RANK 26 -> 18 findings. 1 corroborated: security + ci-hygiene independently found the scan workflow's path filter references a directory renamed in PR #212 — the gate has not executed in 6 weeks. Tracker cross-check: 2 findings already open (#88, #103) — annotated, not re-filed. 1 finding matches closed #71 — flagged as regression, escalated. Phase 5: PUBLISH 4 theme issues filed: #240 CI gate integrity (1 corroborated HIGH + 2 MEDIUM, 4 checkboxes) #241 Test depth on high-blast-radius tools (1 HIGH + 3 MEDIUM) #242 Docs drift after the v3 rename (5 findings) #243 Hygiene bucket (4 LOW) Report: 5/5 dimensions audited, 0 UNAUDITED. Phase 6: skipped (--fix not passed). ``` ### Example: Rejecting an in-audit fix While auditing, the ci-hygiene agent proposes: "the path filter fix is a one-line change, I applied it." This violates the Iron Law — the change is reverted, the finding is recorded with the proposed one-liner as its `suggestedAction`, and it later lands via the Phase 6 fix agent's PR against theme issue #240, where the fix also gains the regression test the drive-by one-liner would have skipped.