Skill Audit
Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review
MCP get_skill({ skillId: "systematic-audit-process-eba95fd4" })Use this skill with your agent
Create a free account and connect via MCP
> **Host: Codex CLI** — This skill was designed for Claude Code and adapted for Codex.
> Cross-reference commands use installed skill names in Codex rather than `/octo:*` slash commands.
> Use the active Codex shell and subagent tools. Do not claim a provider, model, or host subagent is available until the current session exposes it.
> For host tool equivalents, see `skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md`.
# Systematic Audit Process
## Overview
Comprehensive, methodical auditing to find issues, inconsistencies, and broken features across a codebase.
**Core principle:** Define scope → Create checklist → Execute systematically → Report findings → Prioritize fixes.
## When to Use
**Use this skill when user wants to:**
- Audit entire application for issues
- Find all instances of a problem pattern
- Check for broken features systematically
- Comprehensive quality verification
- Identify inconsistencies across codebase
**Do NOT use for:**
- Security vulnerability scanning (use skill-security-audit)
- Code quality review (use skill-code-review)
- Single file searches (use Grep/Glob directly)
- Performance profiling
## The Process
### Phase 1: Scope Definition
#### Step 1: Understand Audit Objectives
```markdown
**Audit Objectives:**
What to audit: [app features, code patterns, specific issues]
Why auditing: [what prompted this, what problem are we solving]
Scope: [entire app, specific module, particular feature set]
Depth: [surface-level or deep inspection]
```
#### Step 2: Define Audit Criteria
Use AskUserQuestion if needed:
```markdown
**Audit Focus:**
Which aspects should I audit?
1. Functional - Do features work as expected?
2. Consistency - Are patterns applied uniformly?
3. Completeness - Are implementations finished?
4. Quality - Is code maintainable?
5. User-facing - Does UI/UX work correctly?
6. Integration - Do components work together?
```
#### Step 3: Create Audit Plan
```markdown
**Audit Plan**
**Areas to Cover:**
1. [Area 1: e.g., All form submissions]
2. [Area 2: e.g., All API endpoints]
3. [Area 3: e.g., All button states]
4. [Area 4: e.g., All error handling]
**Methodology:**
- [ ] Identify all instances
- [ ] Test each systematically
- [ ] Document findings
- [ ] Categorize by severity
- [ ] Propose fixes
**Estimated Coverage:** [X components, Y files, Z features]
```
### Phase 2: Discovery
#### Step 1: Identify Audit Targets
Use Glob and Grep to find all relevant code:
```markdown
**Finding Audit Targets:**
Searching for: [pattern/feature]
Method: [glob pattern or grep query]
**Found:**
1. [File 1:line]
2. [File 2:line]
3. [File 3:line]
...
N. [File N:line]
Total instances: [N]
```
#### Step 2: Create Audit Checklist
```markdown
**Audit Checklist:**
- [ ] Item 1: [component/feature to check]
- Location: [file:line]
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Test: [how to verify]
- [ ] Item 2: [component/feature to check]
- Location: [file:line]
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Test: [how to verify]
...
Total items to audit: [N]
```
Use task plan tool to track audit progress.
### Phase 3: Systematic Execution
#### Step 1: Execute Audit Checklist
For each item:
```markdown
**Auditing Item [N]/[Total]: [Description]**
**Location:** [file:line]
**Check 1: [Test name]**
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Method: [how to test - code review, runtime check, etc.]
- Result: ✓ Pass / ❌ Fail
- Evidence: [what you observed]
**Check 2: [Test name]**
- Expected: [what should happen]
- Method: [how to test]
- Result: ✓ Pass / ❌ Fail
- Evidence: [what you observed]
**Overall Status:** ✓ Pass / ⚠️ Issues Found / ❌ Broken
**Issues:**
[If any issues, list them here]
```
#### Step 2: Track Progress
```
Audit Progress:
✓ [1/50] User login form
✓ [2/50] Password reset form
⚠️ [3/50] Registration form (issues found)
❌ [4/50] Contact form (broken)
⚙️ [5/50] Newsletter signup (in progress)
- [6/50] Survey form
...
```
### Phase 4: Analysis & Reporting
#### Step 1: Categorize Findings
```markdown
**Audit Findings Summary**
**Critical Issues (Broken Functionality):**
1. [Issue 1]
- Location: [file:line]
- Impact: [what's broken]
- Severity: Critical
2. [Issue 2]
- Location: [file:line]
- Impact: [what's broken]
- Severity: Critical
**Major Issues (Degraded Functionality):**
1. [Issue 1]
- Location: [file:line]
- Impact: [what's wrong]
- Severity: Major
**Minor Issues (Inconsistencies/Polish):**
1. [Issue 1]
- Location: [file:line]
- Impact: [what's inconsistent]
- Severity: Minor
**Passed Checks:**
- [N] items fully functional
- [List if relevant]
```
#### Step 2: Provide Statistics
```markdown
**Audit Statistics**
Total Items Audited: [N]
✓ Passed: [N] ([X%])
⚠️ Issues Found: [N] ([X%])
❌ Broken: [N] ([X%])
**By Category:**
- Critical: [N]
- Major: [N]
- Minor: [N]
**Coverage:**
- Files reviewed: [N]
- Components tested: [N]
- Code paths verified: [N]
```
### Phase 5: Remediation Plan
#### Step 1: Prioritize Issues
```markdown
**Recommended Fix Priority:**
**Phase 1: Critical Fixes (Do First)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
- Why critical: [reason]
- Estimated effort: [time]
2. [Issue - file:line]
- Why critical: [reason]
- Estimated effort: [time]
**Phase 2: Major Fixes (Do Next)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
- Impact: [description]
- Estimated effort: [time]
**Phase 3: Minor Fixes (Nice to Have)**
1. [Issue - file:line]
- Impact: [description]
- Estimated effort: [time]
**Total Estimated Effort:** [sum of all fixes]
```
#### Step 2: Offer to Execute Fixes
```markdown
**Next Steps:**
I found [N] issues during the audit.
Would you like me to:
1. Fix all critical issues now (estimated [time])
2. Fix issues one category at a time (critical → major → minor)
3. Let you review findings first, then decide what to fix
4. Create detailed tickets/todos for each issue
What's your preference?
```
## Common Patterns
### Pattern 1: Audit Entire App for Broken Features
```
User: "Create a process to audit and check the entire app for things that might be broken"
Implementation:
**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit all user-facing features
- Check for runtime errors
- Verify expected behavior
**Phase 2: Discovery**
- List all features (from routes, components, docs)
- Create comprehensive checklist
**Phase 3: Execute**
- Test each feature systematically
- Document working vs broken
**Phase 4: Report**
- Critical: Features that crash
- Major: Features that work incorrectly
- Minor: Features with UX issues
**Phase 5: Fix**
- Prioritized remediation plan
```
### Pattern 2: Audit for Specific Pattern
```
User: "Find all instances of direct DOM manipulation and check if they should use React state"
Implementation:
**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit: Direct DOM manipulation patterns
- Goal: Identify React anti-patterns
**Phase 2: Discovery**
- Grep for: document.querySelector, getElementById, etc.
- Found: [N] instances
**Phase 3: Execute**
- Check each instance:
- Is there a good reason for direct DOM?
- Should it use React state instead?
- Is it causing bugs?
**Phase 4: Report**
- List instances that should migrate to React
- List instances that are fine as-is
**Phase 5: Fix**
- Refactor problematic instances
```
### Pattern 3: Consistency Audit
```
User: "Audit the app for button style consistency"
Implementation:
**Phase 1: Scope**
- Audit: All button elements
- Goal: Ensure consistent styling
**Phase 2: Discovery**
- Find all buttons in codebase
- Identify button component(s)
**Phase 3: Execute**
- Check each button against style guide
- Document inconsistencies
**Phase 4: Report**
- Buttons using correct component: [N]
- Buttons with inconsistent styles: [N]
- Buttons using deprecated patterns: [N]
**Phase 5: Fix**
- Standardize all buttons to design system
```
## Integration with Other Skills
### With skill-debug
```
Audit found a broken feature?
→ Use skill-debug to investigate root cause
→ Use systematic debugging to fix
```
### With skill-visual-feedback
```
Audit found UI inconsistencies?
→ Use skill-visual-feedback to fix visual issues
→ Ensure consistency across app
```
### With skill-iterative-loop
```
Large audit with many items?
→ Use skill-iterative-loop to process in batches
→ Loop through sections of the app
```
### With skill-security-audit
```
Audit includes security concerns?
→ Delegate security-specific checks to skill-security-audit
→ Use skill-audit for functional checks
```
## Best Practices
### 1. Be Systematic, Not Random
**Good:**
```
Auditing all form submissions:
1. Login form
2. Registration form
3. Password reset form
4. Contact form
5. Newsletter signup
...
(Methodical, complete)
```
**Poor:**
```
Checking some forms:
- Login form
- Maybe that contact thing
- Whatever else I find
(Random, incomplete)
```
### 2. Document Everything
For each audit item, record:
- What was checked
- How it was checked
- Result (pass/fail)
- Evidence (what you observed)
### 3. Use Categories
Group findings into meaningful categories:
- By severity (critical, major, minor)
- By type (functional, UI, consistency, performance)
- By component (forms, navigation, data display)
### 4. Make Findings Actionable
**Good:**
```
Issue: Registration form submit button doesn't work
Location: src/components/RegisterForm.tsx:45
Root cause: onClick handler missing
Fix: Add onClick={handleSubmit}
Effort: 5 minutes
```
**Poor:**
```
Issue: Some button broken somewhere
Fix: Fix it
```
## Red Flags - Don't Do This
| Action | Why It's Wrong |
|--------|----------------|
| Skip creating checklist | Will miss things, duplicate work |
| Test randomly without system | Incomplete coverage |
| Not documenting findings | Can't prioritize or fix later |
| Audit without clear criteria | Don't know what "pass" means |
| Fix while auditing | Confuses audit with remediation |
| Ignore patterns | Miss systemic issues |
## Audit Templates
### Template 1: Functional Feature Audit
```markdown
**Feature:** [Name]
**Location:** [file:line]
**Tests:**
- [ ] Feature loads without errors
- [ ] Feature responds to user input
- [ ] Feature displays correct data
- [ ] Feature handles errors gracefully
- [ ] Feature works on mobile
- [ ] Feature is accessible
**Result:** ✓ Pass / ⚠️ Issues / ❌ Broken
**Issues:** [if any]
```
### Template 2: Code Pattern Audit
```markdown
**Pattern:** [What to check]
**Instance:** [file:line]
**Checks:**
- [ ] Follows current best practices
- [ ] Consistent with codebase
- [ ] No deprecated APIs used
- [ ] Properly typed/documented
- [ ] No obvious bugs
**Result:** ✓ Good / ⚠️ Needs update / ❌ Problematic
**Notes:** [any observations]
```
### Template 3: UI Consistency Audit
```markdown
**Component:** [Name]
**Location:** [file:line]
**Checks:**
- [ ] Uses design system components
- [ ] Follows spacing guidelines
- [ ] Uses correct colors
- [ ] Typography consistent
- [ ] Responsive design works
- [ ] States handled (hover, active, disabled)
**Result:** ✓ Consistent / ⚠️ Minor issues / ❌ Inconsistent
**Issues:** [if any]
```
## Quick Reference
| Audit Type | Discovery Method | Check Method | Output |
|------------|------------------|--------------|--------|
| Functional | List features | Test each | Pass/fail report |
| Pattern | Grep for code | Review each instance | Compliant/non-compliant |
| Consistency | Find all instances | Compare to standard | Consistent/inconsistent |
| Completeness | List requirements | Verify each exists | Complete/incomplete |
## The Bottom Line
```
Systematic audit → Complete checklist + Methodical execution + Prioritized findings
Otherwise → Missed issues + Duplicate work + No clear action plan
```
**Define scope. Create checklist. Execute systematically. Report findings. Prioritize fixes.**Related Skills
More skills in Software Engineering
Accessibility Standards
Comprehensive web accessibility standards based on WCAG 2.2 AA, with 38+ anti-patterns, legal enforcement context (EAA, ADA Title II), WAI-ARIA patterns, and framework-specific fixes for modern web frameworks and libraries.
Accord
Authoring unified specification packages across Business/Development/Design teams via staged elaboration (L0 Vision → L1 Requirements → L2 Team Detail → L3 Acceptance Criteria). No code. Use when authoring cross-team specs, building L0-L3 packages, or aligning Biz/Dev/Design on a single source of truth.
Acquire Codebase Knowledge
Use this skill when the user explicitly asks to map, document, or onboard into an existing codebase. Trigger for prompts like "map this codebase", "document this architecture", "onboard me to this repo", or "create codebase docs". Do not trigger for routine feature implementation, bug fixes, or narrow code edits unless the user asks for repository-level discovery.
Acreadiness Assess
Run the AgentRC readiness assessment on the current repository and produce a static HTML dashboard at reports/index.html. Wraps `npx github:microsoft/agentrc readiness` and hands off rendering to the @ai-readiness-reporter custom agent. Supports policies (--policy) for org-specific scoring. Use when asked to assess, audit, or score the AI readiness of a repo.
Acreadiness Generate Instructions
Generate tailored AI agent instruction files via AgentRC instructions command. Produces .github/copilot-instructions.md (default, recommended for Copilot in VS Code) plus optional per-area .instructions.md files with applyTo globs for monorepos. Use after running /acreadiness-assess to close gaps in the AI Tooling pillar.
Acreadiness Policy
Help the user pick, write, or apply an AgentRC policy. Policies customise readiness scoring by disabling irrelevant checks, overriding impact/level, setting pass-rate thresholds, or chaining org baselines with team overrides. Use when the user asks about strict mode, AI-only scoring, custom weights, CI gating, or wants org-wide standardisation.
Explore Other Categories
Skills from other categories with shared topics
Code Review Skill
Expert multi-AI code review with inline PR comments — use for thorough quality and security analysis
Github Agents Code Reviewer
Code review expert for quality analysis, security vulnerabilities, and production reliability
1. Product type search — what design patterns fit this product?
Design UI/UX systems with style guides, palettes, typography, and component specs for new interfaces