How do I install the Notes Audit skill?

Run npx skillmds add terrylica/notes-audit in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Notes Audit safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. Capability flags: docs only. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Notes Audit?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Notes Audit free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Notes Audit?

terrylica (@terrylica) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Notes Audit by terrylica — Agent Skill

Name: Notes Audit
Rating: 4.2 (5 reviews)
Author: terrylica

Notes Audit

Analyze the macOS Notes folder taxonomy and propose a better organization - find empty/near-empty folders, oversized dumping grounds, duplicate-purpose folders, mixed-language naming, and stale content; then present a target hierarchy for operator approval BEFORE any moves. Use when notes feel sporadic/messy, before a big cleanup, or to review organization health periodically. TRIGGERS - audit my notes, notes are a mess, propose notes organization, analyze notes folders, notes cleanup plan.

terrylica 6fa1cd9 4.0 KB Updated Sep 9, 2026

File contents

notes-audit — analyze, then PROPOSE (never act unilaterally)

Self-Evolving skill — if the smell table stops matching how the operator actually organizes (new smells found, false positives), evolve the table in this SKILL.md; see the Post-Execution Reflection at the bottom.

This skill is an analysis workflow, not a script: you (Claude) gather the data with the plugin's CLIs, reason over it, and present a proposal. No reorganization happens in this skill — execution belongs to notes-organize, only after operator approval.

1. Gather

NC="$HOME/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/cc-skills/plugins/notes-commander/scripts/notes.ts"
bun "$NC" inventory --json          # folder tree + counts (fast; always do this)
bun "$NC" export                    # full snapshot when content-level analysis is wanted

For content-level auditing, Read the snapshot's manifest.json (note names, per-note modified dates, char counts) and sample individual markdown files — do NOT paste hundreds of notes into context; sample representatives per folder.

2. Analyze — look for these smells

Smell	Signal in the data	Typical proposal
Empty/near-empty folders	`count` 0–2	merge into a sibling or an `Archive`
Dumping ground	one folder ≫ others (e.g. a 100+ default "Notes")	split by detected themes
Duplicate purpose	two folders whose names/content overlap	merge, keep the better-named one
Mixed-language taxonomy	sibling folders in different languages for related topics	group under one parent per domain, keep native names as leaves
Stale content	manifest `modified` dates years old across a folder	move to `Archive / <year>`
Deep-vs-flat mismatch	20+ flat top-level folders	introduce 3–6 domain parents, nest leaves

Respect what's working: don't propose churn for folders that are already coherent.

3. Propose

Present, in this order:

A target hierarchy (tree view) with each existing folder's destination.
The move list — the exact mkdir / move-note / merge-folder commands (with --dry-run variants) that implement it.
Manual items — anything the tooling deliberately won't do: deleting emptied folders, cross-account moves, tag cleanup (no AppleScript API for tags).

Then STOP and get explicit approval. On approval, hand off to notes-organize and follow its safety protocol (snapshot → dry-run → execute → verify counts).

Post-Execution Reflection

After an audit, check: (1) did the operator reject/modify parts of the proposal? Their reasoning is a missing smell or a wrong default — encode it in the smell table. (2) Did any proposal require a capability the tooling lacks (tags, cross-account)? Confirm it's listed under manual items. (3) Did sampling miss something the operator knew about a folder? Note the folder type so the next audit samples it deeper. Update only for real, reproducible gaps.

---name: notes-auditdescription: Analyze the macOS Notes folder taxonomy and propose a better organization - find empty/near-empty folders, oversized dumping grounds, duplicate-purpose folders, mixed-language naming, and stale content; then present a target hierarchy for operator approval BEFORE any moves. Use when notes feel sporadic/messy, before a big cleanup, or to review organization health periodically. TRIGGERS - audit my notes, notes are a mess, propose notes organization, analyze notes folders, notes cleanup plan.--- # notes-audit — analyze, then PROPOSE (never act unilaterally) > **Self-Evolving skill** — if the smell table stops matching how the operator actually organizes (new smells found, false positives), evolve the table in this SKILL.md; see the Post-Execution Reflection at the bottom. This skill is an analysis workflow, not a script: you (Claude) gather the data with the plugin's CLIs, reason over it, and present a proposal. **No reorganization happens in this skill** — execution belongs to `notes-organize`, only after operator approval. ## 1. Gather ```bash NC="$HOME/.claude/plugins/marketplaces/cc-skills/plugins/notes-commander/scripts/notes.ts" bun "$NC" inventory --json # folder tree + counts (fast; always do this) bun "$NC" export # full snapshot when content-level analysis is wanted ``` For content-level auditing, Read the snapshot's `manifest.json` (note names, per-note modified dates, char counts) and sample individual markdown files — do NOT paste hundreds of notes into context; sample representatives per folder. ## 2. Analyze — look for these smells | Smell | Signal in the data | Typical proposal | | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- | | Empty/near-empty folders | `count` 0–2 | merge into a sibling or an `Archive` | | Dumping ground | one folder ≫ others (e.g. a 100+ default "Notes") | split by detected themes | | Duplicate purpose | two folders whose names/content overlap | merge, keep the better-named one | | Mixed-language taxonomy | sibling folders in different languages for related topics | group under one parent per domain, keep native names as leaves | | Stale content | manifest `modified` dates years old across a folder | move to `Archive / <year>` | | Deep-vs-flat mismatch | 20+ flat top-level folders | introduce 3–6 domain parents, nest leaves | Respect what's working: don't propose churn for folders that are already coherent. ## 3. Propose Present, in this order: 1. **A target hierarchy** (tree view) with each existing folder's destination. 2. **The move list** — the exact `mkdir` / `move-note` / `merge-folder` commands (with `--dry-run` variants) that implement it. 3. **Manual items** — anything the tooling deliberately won't do: deleting emptied folders, cross-account moves, tag cleanup (no AppleScript API for tags). Then STOP and get explicit approval. On approval, hand off to `notes-organize` and follow its safety protocol (snapshot → dry-run → execute → verify counts). ## Post-Execution Reflection After an audit, check: (1) did the operator reject/modify parts of the proposal? Their reasoning is a missing smell or a wrong default — encode it in the smell table. (2) Did any proposal require a capability the tooling lacks (tags, cross-account)? Confirm it's listed under manual items. (3) Did sampling miss something the operator knew about a folder? Note the folder type so the next audit samples it deeper. Update only for real, reproducible gaps.

Frequently asked questions