# Audit Shinyreact Features > Audit FEATURES.md against the shinyreact source — confirm, contradict, or flag every leaf, and find behavior in the code that the tree never claims. Use when the user says "audit features", "/audit-shinyreact-features", "is FEATURES.md still true", or after a change that may have drifted from the tree. - Skill: `posit-dev/audit-shinyreact-features` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add posit-dev/audit-shinyreact-features` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/posit-dev/audit-shinyreact-features/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Security - Author: posit-dev (https://skillmd.com/u/posit-dev) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/posit-dev/audit-shinyreact-features --- # Audit `FEATURES.md` `FEATURES.md` claims what shinyreact does. This audit checks whether it is still true, in **both** directions, and reports coverage as numbers rather than as assurance. It **reports**; it does not edit `FEATURES.md` or the code unless the user asks for fixes afterwards. Read the "The feature tree" section of `CLAUDE.md` first — it defines the leaf format, the language markers, and the completeness bar you are auditing against. ## Scope Default: the whole file. If the user names a section ("audit the page entry points") or a language ("audit the R leaves"), audit only that and say so in the report header. ## Step 1 — build the inventories first Do this **before** reading a single leaf. Auditing from the tree alone can only ever confirm the tree; the inventories are what let you find what the tree omits, and they keep the leaf pass honest about what it skipped. For each package in scope, collect and **count**: | Inventory | How | |---|---| | public symbols + signatures + defaults | `pkg-py/src/shinyreact/__init__.py`'s `__all__`, `pkg-r/NAMESPACE`, `pkg-js/src/global.ts` + `npm.ts` exports | | error and warning sites | `grep -n "raise \|warnings.warn\|cli_abort\|stop(\|warning(\|throw new" ` | | caller-steerable branches | `grep -n "if \|else\|elif \|try:\|except \|switch" ` — filter to branches a caller's input can select | | fallback values | the `X if Y else Z` and `??` / `||` defaults, especially path and version fallbacks | | unit test names | `grep -h "^def test\|^test_that\| it(" ` | | e2e test names | `pkg-py/tests/playwright/test_*.py` | Keep each inventory as a list. Every item must end the audit either matched to a leaf or reported as unclaimed. That accounting is the deliverable — an audit that cannot say how many of the 41 branch sites are described by leaves has not finished. ## Step 2 — tree → code Walk **every leaf** in scope, in file order. Skipping leaves because they look obvious is how a stale tree survives an audit. Decide each from the source — not from docstrings, not from `CLAUDE.md`, not from memory. Docstrings and `CLAUDE.md` are themselves unverified claims, and have been wrong before. | Verdict | Means | |---|---| | `CONFIRMED ` | the code does this; cite the line that proves it | | `CONTRADICTED ` | the code does something else; say what it actually does | | `NOT FOUND IN CODE` | no code implements this claim | | `UNVERIFIABLE` | not atomically checkable as written; say what would make it checkable | Rules for this pass: - Markers narrow where to look: `[py]` → `pkg-py/src/shinyreact/`, `[r]` → `pkg-r/R/`, `[js]` → `pkg-js/src/`. - An **unmarked** leaf claims every language its subtree applies to. Check each one and give a per-language verdict when they disagree — a leaf that is true in Python and false in R is `CONTRADICTED`, not `CONFIRMED`. - `(verify)` leaves are normal targets, not exemptions. Resolving one to CONFIRMED means its marker can be dropped; say so. - `(e2e)` leaves must be traced to an actual assertion in the named test, not just to a test whose name sounds right. - Tests are supporting evidence, never the primary source. Note which leaves a test pins (`CONFIRMED ..., pinned by `) and which no test pins — the latter are the ones that will drift silently. ## Step 3 — code → tree Now walk the inventories from step 1 and list what has **no leaf**. This half is where the findings usually are: - public symbols, parameters, and defaults with no leaf - error paths, warnings, and validation with no leaf - caller-steerable branches with no leaf (existence checks, `None` fallbacks, absolute vs. relative, marker present/absent) - silent fallback values with no leaf - tests whose asserted behavior no leaf describes - parity gaps: a behavior in one language whose sibling leaf is missing Classify each as **undocumented behavior** (the tree needs a leaf) or **scope creep** (the code does more than intended). If it is genuinely unclear, say so and let the user decide — do not guess. ## Step 4 — report Markdown, no `ReportFindings` tool. Lead with the numbers, then what needs action, then compact confirmations. ``` # FEATURES.md audit — Leaves: CONFIRMED 61 · CONTRADICTED 2 · NOT FOUND 1 · UNVERIFIABLE 3 Coverage: symbols 14/14 · errors 4/4 · branches 33/41 · fallbacks 5/7 · tests 88/94 · e2e 9/9 Unclaimed behavior: 7 ## Needs action - CONTRADICTED — "version falls back to `0.1.0`" → `_dep.py:24` falls back to `"0"` - ... ## Unclaimed behavior - undocumented — `page_react_dep(name=)` has no leaf — `_page.py:127` - scope creep? — ... ## Leaves no test pins - "the stylesheet is attached unconditionally" — no assertion anywhere ## Confirmed ### Wire protocol - protocol version is `1.0` — `_protocol.py:17`, pinned by `test_protocol_version_matches_js_and_r` - ... ``` End with one line of judgment: is the tree trustworthy right now, and which section is least trustworthy. ## Rules - **The code wins.** A disagreement is a tree bug until the user says the code is wrong. - **Cite `file:line` for every CONFIRMED and CONTRADICTED.** An audit without citations is an opinion. Line numbers live in the *report*, never in `FEATURES.md` — there they rot. - **Report absence.** A leaf you could not check, an inventory you could not complete, a package you ran out of budget on — all findings, none of them things to quietly drop. Never round a partial audit up to a clean one. - **Do not fix while auditing.** Findings first; the user decides what changes. - Fan out with subagents for a whole-file audit — one per section or per language — but give each the inventory it must account for, require verdicts with citations, and merge the results yourself. A subagent's summary is not a substitute for leaf-level verdicts, and "looks good" from a subagent is a failed audit, not a pass.