# Skill Auditor > Use when reviewing, grading, auditing, or improving a whole existing skill or pack - judging whether a skill is good, fixing one that misfires or won't activate, or driving one or many skills to a quality bar. Audits to an absolute A+ bar and hands back ship-ready SKILL.md rewrites, not a report the user must act on. Do NOT use when tightening only a description or trigger in isolation - use skill-description-writer instead; do NOT use when authoring a brand-new skill from scratch - use skill-creator instead. - Skill: `skillmedev/skill-auditor` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add skillmedev/skill-auditor` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/skillmedev/skill-auditor/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Docs & Writing - Author: SkillMedev (https://skillmd.com/u/skillmedev) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/skillmedev/skill-auditor --- # Skill Auditor Audit whole skills and packs to an absolute A+ bar and hand back ship-ready rewrites - not a report the user then has to act on. Where an artifact falls short, diagnose precisely and return the finished, committable SKILL.md. ## The bar - what A+ means A+ is absolute, not the top of whatever is in front of you. A skill is A+ only if all of these hold: - It **fires on exactly the right requests and never on the wrong ones.** The description front-loads a concrete trigger a router can act on with no ambiguity, and carves negative scope against every plausible neighbor. - It **does not collide** with any other skill. Two skills never both fire for one request unless that is intended and their bodies coordinate. - Its body carries the **full paid-quality anatomy** (skill-author is the canonical standard): an ordered operating procedure, input elicitation, concrete practitioner thresholds, at least one worked artifact (filled example, good/bad pair, FILL-field template, or runnable calculator), an explicit deliverable, a Do NOT section with the why, and a quality bar. A body of tips-in-arbitrary-order is a B at best, however accurate the tips. - It is **token-disciplined.** Descriptions load every session; bodies load on trigger. Every word is paid for on every session of every installer. Bloat is a recurring tax. - It is **correct and self-contained** - real tools, paths, and numbers; no hallucinated capabilities; no context it has not established; no dates, versions, or "latest". If an expert author could meaningfully improve it, it is not yet A+. ## Procedure Read every artifact from source - the actual SKILL.md, or pull from the catalog via browse_skills / browse_packs. Audit what ships, not what you assume ships. **Auditing one skill:** go straight to the per-skill audit. **Auditing several skills or a whole catalog:** run the portfolio pass first - collisions and gaps are invisible from inside a single skill. If the set exceeds ~8 skills, run the portfolio pass once globally, then audit in batches of 5-6 so each stays deep. State which batch you are on. ### Portfolio pass (multi-skill only) 1. **Inventory** - every skill and pack with its current trigger, one line each. 2. **Collision map** - for each pair whose triggers could fire on the same request, decide: coordinated (fine) or territory theft (defect). 3. **Gap map** - workflows a user would expect covered where nothing fires. 4. **Drift** - inconsistent naming, frontmatter, or body structure. The set must read as one authored voice. Output this as a short brief before any per-item audit. ### Per-skill audit Score against the rubric, assign the current grade, then drive to A+. Below A+, the rewrite is mandatory. Rubric, weighted: 1. **Trigger precision** *(heaviest)* - Does the description front-load *when to activate*? Are triggers concrete (task verbs, named artifacts, quoted user phrasing), not abstract? Is it about the user's request, not the skill's internals? 2. **Scope discipline** - Explicit negative scope in the form "Do NOT use when… - use instead" wherever a misfire into a named neighbor is plausible. Clear of every other skill's territory. 3. **Anatomy completeness** - Ordered procedure with dependency reasoning; input elicitation with defaults; concrete thresholds (real numbers, or explicit if/then rules where the domain has none); at least one worked artifact; an explicit Deliverable; a Do NOT section; a quality bar; an escalation boundary where the domain requires one. 4. **Substance density** - The content beats what the base model produces unprompted. Named frameworks, practitioner numbers, encoded failure modes. An accurate essay scores B; an operating procedure scores A. 5. **Token economy** - Every line earns its place. No preamble, hedging, or restating general knowledge. Description as short as unambiguous allows. 6. **Correctness and self-containment** - Real tools, paths, bundled-file references; no hallucinated capabilities; diagnostic skills require captured evidence before prescribing. 7. **Format compliance** - Valid frontmatter (name, description); consistent house voice; plain slug mentions for cross-links (no wiki-link syntax); no time-sensitive or version-pinned language. Grade bands: **A+** meets the absolute bar on every dimension. **A / A−** strong, cosmetic polish only. **B** functional but incomplete anatomy, drift, or bloat. **C** vague trigger or structural weakness; frequently misfires or fails to fire. **D / F** broken. Output per skill: ``` ### - Grade: → A+ Verdict: Defects: - [Trigger] - [Scope] - [Anatomy] - [Substance] - [Economy] Rewrite: --- name: description: --- # ``` If a skill is already A+, say so in one line. Do not pad it with invented problems. ### Per-pack audit A pack of individually-A+ skills can still be a B pack. Rubric: 1. **Coherence** - one nameable job-to-be-done or persona. 2. **Complementarity** - members are non-redundant; none fight over a trigger inside the bundle; cross-links route between members by slug. 3. **Coverage** - the pack fully covers the workflow it promises, in an explicit install sequence where order matters. 4. **Cardinality** - right size; not padded with weak members, not missing an obvious one. 5. **Description** - sells the outcome and trigger, not a contents list. Output per pack: ``` ### - Grade: → A+ Verdict: Composition: Defects: - [Coherence|Coverage|Cardinality|Description] Rewrite: - description: - members: ``` ### Roll-up (multi-skill only) Close with: skills now at A+ vs. still blocked and why; collisions resolved and still open; gaps worth filling with new skills (name + one-line trigger each); convention fixes to apply set-wide. ## What NOT to do - **Don't stop at diagnosis.** Anything below A+ comes back as a finished, committable SKILL.md. - **Don't be vague.** "Tighten the description" is not a defect. "Description leads with what the skill does instead of when it fires - front-load the .docx trigger" is. - **Don't invent defects.** If it is A+, declare it and move on. Manufacturing problems to look thorough is itself a failure. - **Don't widen, repurpose, or rename.** A rewrite raises quality only; preserve the skill's real scope and never introduce a collision with a neighbor. - **Don't replace correct domain content with generic filler.** The rewrite deepens and restructures; losing a practitioner number or framework the original had is a regression. - **Don't let the bar drift.** The strongest item in the current batch does not redefine A+ downward.