wolverin0 Skill: Audit Blind Spots Walk
This skill walks the 19 AI-to-AI blind spots from
@.claude/context/audit-blind-spots.md and produces a structured
report. The findings are then routed by the orchestrator into the
appropriate domain sections.
Why this is a separate skill (not folded into domains)
Blind spots cross domain boundaries. B1 (auth not wired) is a security finding AND a code-quality finding AND a reliability finding. Running the blind-spot walk once and routing findings into domains is more efficient than asking each domain to re-discover its share.
Process
Pre-flight
view @.claude/context/audit-rules.md
view @.claude/context/audit-blind-spots.md
Walk B1-B19 in order
For each B-class, follow the detection commands from audit-blind-spots.md. The walk is mostly grep + read, but B1, B7, B8 require substantial code-tracing.
Per-blind-spot template
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
B<N> — <n>
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Detection commands run:
<list>
If output is clean:
Status: NOT PRESENT
Notes: <e.g., "no auth middleware found, but app uses Supabase Auth
integrated into FastAPI dependencies — different
pattern, B1 doesn't apply">
If output has matches:
Status: PRESENT (<N> instances)
Findings:
F-B<N>.1
Evidence: <path:line>
Pattern: <which sub-pattern>
Severity: Critical | High | Medium | Low
Routing: Domain <N> (which domain this finding belongs to)
What's wrong: <one paragraph>
Why it matters: <one sentence>
[F-B<N>.2 etc. if more]
Routing table — where each B finding goes
The orchestrator uses this to put findings in the right domain section:
| Blind spot | Primary domain | Secondary domain |
|---|---|---|
| B1 (Auth not wired) | Domain 1 (Security) | — |
| B2 (Error returns success) | Domain 7 (Reliability) | Domain 1 |
| B3 (FE-only pagination) | Domain 5 (Performance) | Domain 3 |
| B4 (Soft-delete unfiltered) | Domain 3 (Database) | Domain 1 |
| B5 (Env var existence-only) | Domain 4 (DevOps) | Domain 7 |
| B6 (Single-user assumptions) | Domain 5 (Performance) | Domain 7 |
| B7 (Validation asymmetry) | Domain 1 (Security) | Domain 6 |
| B8 (IDOR) | Domain 1 (Security) | — |
| B9 (Dead utilities) | Domain 13 (Code Integrity) | Domain 9 |
| B10 (Optimistic UI no rollback) | Domain 6 (UX/A11y) | Domain 7 |
| B11 (Webhook idempotency) | Domain 7 (Reliability) | Domain 1 |
| B12 (Stack mixing) | Domain 13 (Code Integrity) | Domain 2 |
| B13 (Test mirrors code) | Domain 13 (Code Integrity) | Domain 9 |
| B14 (Comment-code drift) | Domain 13 (Code Integrity) | Domain 9 |
| B15 (Coverage theater) | Domain 9 (Maintainability) | Domain 13 |
| B16 (Sync heavy op in request) | Domain 5 (Performance) | Domain 7 |
| B17 (Missing cache on hot path) | Domain 5 (Performance) | Domain 10 (Cost) |
| B18 (Non-idempotent user action) | Domain 7 (Reliability) | Domain 1 |
| B19 (UI missing one of 4 states) | Domain 6 (UX/A11y) | — |
Output format
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
AI-TO-AI BLIND SPOTS WALK
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Walked 19 blind-spot classes. Findings routed to domains as follows.
B1 — Auth present but not wired: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B2 — Error handlers returning success: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B3 — Frontend-only pagination: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B4 — Soft-delete unfiltered: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B5 — Env var existence-only checks: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B6 — Single-user assumptions: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B7 — Validation asymmetry: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B8 — Authorization gap (IDOR): [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B9 — Dead imports / unreachable utils: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B10 — Optimistic UI without rollback: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B11 — Webhook idempotency missing: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B12 — Stack mixing: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B13 — Test mirrors code: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B14 — Comment-code drift: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B15 — Coverage theater: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B16 — Sync heavy op in request cycle: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B17 — Missing cache on hot/expensive path: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B18 — Non-idempotent user action: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
B19 — UI missing one of 4 states: [PRESENT/NOT PRESENT]
[Then the detailed findings per PRESENT class, routed to domains]
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
SUMMARY
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Present: <N> of 19
Most pervasive (highest count): <which blind spot, in how many places>
Critical findings from walk: <count>
High findings from walk: <count>
[SECTION COMPLETE: audit-blind-spots]
Failure modes to refuse
- ❌ Skipping a B-class because it "probably doesn't apply" — walk all 15
- ❌ Marking PRESENT without specific evidence (path:line)
- ❌ Routing all findings to the same domain to "consolidate" — use the routing table
- ❌ Reading test files for B13 detection but not source files for B14 detection — they're complementary