Artifact Audit

Artifact Audit

Use this skill when the object to inspect is a written artifact rather than the code/runtime result itself. This complements debug-review and audit-review: it checks the quality of evidence documents, not whether code works or whether a branch is promotion-ready.

Inputs

• research knowledge bases and paper cards
• company TASK, HANDOFF, RESULT, or AUDIT documents
• experiment plans and result summaries
• document drafts, proposals, reports, reviews, or rebuttals
• project analysis artifacts

Procedure

1. Define the artifact type and audit scope.
2. Inspect the referenced files only; keep the audit read-only unless the user explicitly asks for fixes.
3. Check:
   • factual claims have source paths, paper notes, commands, logs, or metrics
   • structure matches the artifact's purpose
   • cross-references point to existing files or clearly named external sources
   • missing sections or TODOs would block handoff
   • conclusions are not stronger than the evidence
   • research cards include method, setup, metrics, main numbers, limitations, and relationship to prior work
4. Classify issues by severity: blocking, major, minor, or note.
5. Recommend the smallest correction path or next skill.

Output

Return:

• ARTIFACT_AUDIT_PASS, ARTIFACT_AUDIT_PASS_WITH_WARNINGS, or ARTIFACT_AUDIT_FAIL
• findings ordered by severity
• file/path references
• missing evidence
• recommended next action

Guardrails

• Do not rewrite artifacts unless explicitly asked.
• Do not duplicate audit-review; use that for final branch/result promotion.
• Do not treat a well-written report as proof that the underlying experiment is valid. Route to skeptic-review or audit-review when scientific or merge claims are at stake.