skill-audit

Skill Audit

Audit the requested package against its actual repository and validation surface. Evidence beats stylistic preference.

Choose the Mode

• Routine: structure, activation, pruning, or light edits. Run free plugin lint plus the manual scorecard; do not spend cloud credits.
• Formal: explicit publish readiness, Tessl score, or a substantive discovery/workflow rewrite that must reach 100. Run one narrow cloud review only when the repository-owned launcher, authentication, and credits exist.
• Experiential: a recent task exposed wrong activation, missing guidance, excessive ceremony, or a fragile workflow. Reconstruct that failure and make the smallest change that would alter behavior.

Read Tessl policy for exact formal commands, credit boundaries, fallbacks, and optimizer approval.

Baseline

1. Read repository guidance and the target SKILL.md completely.

2. Inspect linked references, scripts, evals, picker metadata, and package manifest only as required by the audit scope.

3. Discover repository-owned verification.

4. Run the free structural baseline:

   pnpm exec tessl plugin lint skills/<name>
   

5. Apply the scorecard and authoring guidance.

If formal review is unavailable, record the boundary once and continue with lint plus the manual scorecard. Never install, authenticate, resolve a different CLI, invent a score, or spend credits silently.

Audit Dimensions

• Discovery: name and description identify the action, distinct triggers, and main boundary without synonym stuffing.
• Workflow: the body has a clear start, evidence loop, stop condition, and observable completion.
• Progressive disclosure: core decisions stay inline; each reference has a task-shaped retrieval job; repeated deterministic work routes to an existing tool or maintained executable resource.
• Repo fit: links, commands, metadata, and conventions are current and the package remains independently usable.
• Verification: the strongest available mechanical check and realistic evidence loop are explicit.
• Boundaries: the package neither absorbs unrelated work nor depends on a sibling skill identity.

Invalid metadata, broken links or commands, missing completion, repo conflicts, and sibling-package dependencies are blockers. Bloated bodies, vague discovery, abstract examples, duplicated doctrine, and prose replacing an existing deterministic implementation are major findings.

Improve

Fix blockers and highest-leverage majors first. Prefer the smallest change that improves activation, decision quality, or proof. When pruning, measure the common-path context for representative requests; package totals and line count alone do not reveal retrieval cost.

After edits, rerun the same lint and repository gate. Use forward tests only when they can evaluate the skill without leaked conclusions or unsafe external effects.

Output

scope: package or portfolio
validation: commands and Tessl score, or explicit no-score boundary
strengths: highest-signal dimensions
findings: blockers and major findings only
changes: files changed or smallest recommended change; include rerun status