Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Audit codebases for quality, consistency, and broken patterns — use for pre-release or tech debt review
| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-23 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 237% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 119% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 109% | 0% |
| case-10 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 85% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 76% | 0% |
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.
Use this skill when user wants to:
Do NOT use for:
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]
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?
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]
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]
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 TodoWrite to track audit progress.
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] ---
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
...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]
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]
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]
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?
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 planUser: "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 instancesUser: "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 systemAudit found a broken feature?
→ Use skill-debug to investigate root cause
→ Use systematic debugging to fixAudit found UI inconsistencies?
→ Use skill-visual-feedback to fix visual issues
→ Ensure consistency across appLarge audit with many items?
→ Use skill-iterative-loop to process in batches
→ Loop through sections of the appAudit includes security concerns?
→ Delegate security-specific checks to skill-security-audit
→ Use skill-audit for functional checksGood:
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)For each audit item, record:
Group findings into meaningful categories:
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 minutesPoor:
Issue: Some button broken somewhere
Fix: Fix it| 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 |
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]
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]
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]
| 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 |
Systematic audit → Complete checklist + Methodical execution + Prioritized findings
Otherwise → Missed issues + Duplicate work + No clear action planDefine scope. Create checklist. Execute systematically. Report findings. Prioritize fixes.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.