Source profileQuality 92/100

gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/skills/product-audit/SKILL.md

product-audit

Audit the whole product across code, quality, process, docs, roadmap, and tooling. Persist one severity-ranked, F-numbered report with proposals; never fix or file work. Triggers: "product-audit", "audit the product", "full health check", "are we product-ready", "CTO review".

Source repository stars
19
Declared platforms
1
Static risk flags
1
Last source update
2026-08-24
Source checked
2026-08-25

Decision brief

What it does: where it fits

Product-wide health check. It only writes docs/audits/-.md; every proposed action remains a user decision.

Best for

  • Periodically (every few features) or at a product-ready milestone.
  • When you want the broad, honest picture — quality, security, debt, docs, and

Not for

  • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
  • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

Compatibility matrix

Platform support, with evidence labels

PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Claude CodeDeclaredSource recordInstall path and trigger
CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
Open the compatibility checker

Installation

Inspect first. Install second.

The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

Source-detected install commandSource
npx skills add https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill "skills/product-audit"
Safe inspection promptEditorial

Inspect the Agent Skill "product-audit" from https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow/blob/e84db167d6b608e991d68e98bc31f1f91f42cf85/skills/product-audit/SKILL.md at commit e84db167d6b608e991d68e98bc31f1f91f42cf85. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

Workflow

What the source asks the agent to do

  1. 01

    Step 0 — Discover the project (always first)

    Per the agent guide's Workflow conventions + documentation map, then read what THIS skill needs: the roadmap, the fix index, the feature folder layout, and the verification gate. From the map decide the product's nature (web / mobile / console / library / backend / infra). Defer…

    Per the agent guide's Workflow conventions + documentation map, then read what THIS skill needs: the roadmap, the fix index, the feature folder layout, and the verification gate. From the map decide the product's nature…
  2. 02

    Manual-verification checklist (what automation can't confirm)

    Finding set: F + F + F (print every proposed finding; one finding → F) → Next: /triage-issue F F F — classify the complete finding set in one batch (opens the ones that warrant it) · accepted bug/debt → /plan-fix · accepted capability → /plan-feature · nothing to act on → the pe…

    Finding set: F + F + F (print every proposed finding; one finding → F) → Next: /triage-issue F F F — classify the complete finding set in one batch (opens the ones that warrant it) · accepted bug/debt → /plan-fix · acce…Replace every finding placeholder with the complete actual set before printing; never print … or only the first finding in a live hand-off.
  3. 03

    Turn contract — verify before ending the turn

    About to end the turn with any box unchecked? The turn is NOT done — complete the missing box first (weak models drop end-of-document duties; this list is first on purpose).

    About to end the turn with any box unchecked? The turn is NOT done — complete the missing box first (weak models drop end-of-document duties; this list is first on purpose).
  4. 04

    When to use

    Unlike diff, PR, or docs-only reviews, this skill covers the whole product.

    Periodically (every few features) or at a product-ready milestone.When you want the broad, honest picture — quality, security, debt, docs, and- Periodically (every few features) or at a product-ready milestone. - When you want the broad, honest picture — quality, security, debt, docs, and roadmap — not the review of a single change (review-change) or PR (audi…
  5. 05

    Scope

    The entire codebase and its process artifacts: source, tests, the docs tree, the roadmap, the fix index, open issues, and every feature folder's planning docs. Accept an optional path/area to focus a partial audit; state the scope and, if you sample rather than exhaust a dimensi…

    The entire codebase and its process artifacts: source, tests, the docs tree, the roadmap, the fix index, open issues, and every feature folder's planning docs. Accept an optional path/area to focus a partial audit; stat…Tip (provisional). For the broadest, deepest run, the user can turn on ultracode (/effort ultracode — a Claude Code session setting pairing xhigh effort with automatic multi-agent orchestration) so this sweep fans out a…

Permission review

Static risk signals and limitations

Reads files

low · line 31

The documentation asks the agent to read local files, directories, or repositories.

roadmap, the fix index, open issues, and every feature folder's planning docs.

Evidence record

Why each signal appears

EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
Quality score92/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
Repository stars19SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
Compatibility1 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

Pinned source

Provenance and original SKILL.md

Repository
gtrabanco/agentic-workflow
Skill path
skills/product-audit/SKILL.md
Commit
e84db167d6b608e991d68e98bc31f1f91f42cf85
License
MIT
Collected
2026-08-25
Default branch
main
View the original SKILL.md

Product Audit

Product-wide health check. It only writes docs/audits/<n>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md; every proposed action remains a user decision.

Turn contract — verify before ending the turn

✓ The full PRODUCT AUDIT report was printed in the fixed output format (health by dimension, F-numbered ranked findings, four proposal streams — the roadmap streams always present, `none — <why>` when empty)
✓ The report was WRITTEN to `docs/audits/<n>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md` (incremental audit id) and committed — the file is the durable deliverable, the chat print is a copy
✓ Nothing else was fixed, filed, or changed — the report file is the ONLY mutation
✓ The closing `→ Next:` block is printed as the ABSOLUTE last output

About to end the turn with any box unchecked? The turn is NOT done — complete the missing box first (weak models drop end-of-document duties; this list is first on purpose).

When to use

  • Periodically (every few features) or at a product-ready milestone.
  • When you want the broad, honest picture — quality, security, debt, docs, and roadmap — not the review of a single change (review-change) or PR (audit-pr).

Unlike diff, PR, or docs-only reviews, this skill covers the whole product.

Scope

The entire codebase and its process artifacts: source, tests, the docs tree, the roadmap, the fix index, open issues, and every feature folder's planning docs. Accept an optional path/area to focus a partial audit; state the scope and, if you sample rather than exhaust a dimension, say what you sampled — never imply full coverage you didn't do.

Tip (provisional). For the broadest, deepest run, the user can turn on ultracode (/effort ultracode — a Claude Code session setting pairing xhigh effort with automatic multi-agent orchestration) so this sweep fans out across parallel subagents instead of one context window. It's a research-preview feature and a session choice — not something this skill declares (no skill can set effort: ultracode). On agents without it, run the audit as-is: sequential passes over each dimension — only wall-clock changes, never coverage.

Step 0 — Discover the project (always first)

Per the agent guide's Workflow conventions + documentation map, then read what THIS skill needs: the roadmap, the fix index, the feature folder layout, and the verification gate. From the map decide the product's nature (web / mobile / console / library / backend / infra). Defer deciding which dimensions apply until AUDIT_DIMENSIONS.md has been loaded; that resource is the authoritative applicability matrix. Note any optional platform review skills the project installed (extras, never requirements — the internal pack covers every axis).

Progressive loading — audit route

The reference allowlist is exactly the two paths below. Load both after Step 0, in order; they are normative and one hop from this entrypoint.

  1. Read audit dimensions, mark every dimension applicable or n-a: <reason>, and state any sampling.
  2. Read audit process, execute all nine steps, then return the fixed report below.

A missing resource stops the audit; never reconstruct it from memory. Optional platform review skills remain extras, never replacements for the internal pack.

Output format

This exact structure is BOTH the persisted file (docs/audits/<id>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md) and the chat print — identical content, no free-form variations between runs. Every section below appears in every audit; a section with nothing to report states none — <why> instead of being omitted (the roadmap streams especially: "always build the roadmap picture", never silently skip it).

# PRODUCT AUDIT <id> — <product> — <YYYY-MM-DD>
Scope: <whole product | area>
Coverage: <dimensions run | sampled vs. exhaustive>
Verdict: <one-line honest health verdict>

## Health by dimension
  <dimension> .......... ✓ healthy | ⚠ concerns | ✗ at risk | n-a (why)
  ...
  Installed tooling ....... ✓ | ⚠ | ✗ | n-a

## Findings (severity-ranked, one F-sequence for the whole audit)
  F1 [SEV] <dimension> — <finding> — evidence: <file:line | metric | doc> — class: <fix-now|postpone|tradeoff>
  F2 [SEV] ...
  [example — scope-export recurrence] F<k> [med] Workflow discipline — <N>
    consecutive units exported scope via `## Amendments`/descope issues —
    features are being cut too big for real capacity — evidence: <unit list +
    amendments/issues> — class: postpone — route: #64 (atomicity/split rules)

## Proposals — the user decides which to act on

### Issues to open
  - <title> [sev] — from: F<k>[, F<j>] — <why> — route: /triage-issue <id> F<k> — evidence: <…>
  (none — <why>)

### Roadmap — add
  - <feature> — from: F<k> — <rationale & opportunity> — route: plan-feature
  (none — <why>)

### Roadmap — remove / revise
  - <feature> — from: F<k> — <why it no longer fits> — route: triage-issue / roadmap edit
  (none — <why>)

### Tooling — register / re-design
  - <skill|MCP> — register in CLAUDE.md (Optional review extras): <why> — route: user edits CLAUDE.md
  - <skill|MCP> — would change <feature> scope: <why> — route: /design-feature <slug>
  (none — <why>)

## Manual-verification checklist (what automation can't confirm)
  - <item> …

Finding set: F<k> + F<j> + F<m> (print every proposed finding; one finding → F<k>)
→ Next: /triage-issue <id> F<k> F<j> F<m> — classify the complete finding set in one batch (opens the ones that warrant it)
  · accepted bug/debt → /plan-fix   · accepted capability → /plan-feature
  · nothing to act on → the persisted report is the record; move on

Replace every finding placeholder with the complete actual set before printing; never print or only the first finding in a live hand-off.

<id> is the audit's incremental number (Process step 8). A finding is addressable forever as <audit-id> F<k> — e.g. triage-issue 3 F2 reads docs/audits/3-*.md, locates F2, and opens/classifies the issue if warranted. Suggest that routing in the proposals; never run triage or open issues here.

Lead with the honest one-line health verdict (e.g. "shippable with 2 high-sev security items to track first").

Guardrails

  • Never auto-fixes, never opens issues, never edits the roadmap. Output is a report + proposals; every action is the user's decision. The one file this skill writes is its own report under docs/audits/ (plus mkdir -p docs/audits) — nothing else in the repo is touched.
  • Finding ids are F1, F2, … only — one sequence per audit, severity-ranked order, never a different letter per problem type. Once persisted, ids are frozen: a later audit gets a new audit id, never renumbers an old file. When the user accepts, route: triage-issue files/classifies, plan-feature adds roadmap work, plan-fix scopes a concrete fix.
  • Never registers tooling or edits CLAUDE.md. The tooling sweep proposes a skill/MCP to register, but the user (or a routed design-feature run) performs the edit; a scope-affecting discovery routes to /design-feature <slug>, which the user approves.
  • Platform-adaptive: run only applicable axes; always list what you skipped and why.
  • No silent caps. If you sampled, prioritized, or time-boxed a dimension, say so — never present partial coverage as exhaustive.
  • Severity-ranked and deduped: cluster the same issue found via multiple axes or multiple feature docs into one proposal.
  • Honor the project's Workflow conventions (docs-language, evidence): every finding/proposal cites a file:line/metric/doc/issue source; mark uncertainties verify.

Portability (agents other than Claude Code)

The workflow is the contract; Claude Code features are conveniences. On an agent that lacks one, apply the fallback — never skip the step the feature enables:

  • No slash-command menu — where this skill says /<skill>, open that skill's SKILL.md (wherever your agent installed the skills) and follow it literally, in a fresh conversation: hand-offs assume a clean context.
  • No per-skill model:/effort: — this is the widest, highest-stakes sweep in the workflow: run it on your strongest model at its deepest setting, as its own dedicated run — never squeezed into another task's context.
  • No ultracode/subagents — sweep the dimensions sequentially (see the tip above); state coverage honestly either way.

Relationship to other skills

product-audit (whole product, all axes, periodic)
   ├─ composes review-change axes (codebase-wide) + audit-docs (doc coherence)
   ├─ mines feature docs (decisions / known-issues / architecture-notes)
   ├─ sweeps installed skills / connected MCP servers (product-wide, periodic)
   └─ proposes ─┬─ Issues to open ........ ▶ triage-issue / plan-fix
                ├─ Roadmap: add .......... ▶ plan-feature
                ├─ Roadmap: remove/revise  ▶ triage-issue / roadmap edit   (user decides)
                └─ Tooling: register/re-design ▶ user edits CLAUDE.md / design-feature
  • Broader than review-change (one change) and audit-pr (one PR); subsumes audit-docs's coherence check as one of its dimensions.
  • Hands nothing off automatically — it recommends, and the planning/fix/triage skills execute only when the user chooses to.

Done when

  • Every applicable dimension has a health verdict backed by cited evidence, and the skipped or sampled ones are stated.
  • A severity-ranked, F-numbered findings list plus four proposal streams (issues to open, roadmap add, roadmap remove/revise, tooling register/re-design) exist — every stream present (none — <why> when empty), deduped, each proposal routed and citing its source findings.
  • The report is persisted and committed as docs/audits/<id>-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md with the next incremental audit id, and printed in chat.
  • Nothing else was fixed, filed, or changed — the user decides what to act on.
  • The closing → Next: block is printed — typically a batch /triage-issue <id> F<k> … for the proposed issues, then /plan-feature / /plan-fix for the accepted work.

Frequently asked questions

What to verify before installation and use

What does the product-audit source document cover?

Product-wide health check. It only writes docs/audits/-.md; every proposed action remains a user decision.

How do I install product-audit?

The source record exposes this install command: npx skills add https://github.com/gtrabanco/agentic-workflow --skill "skills/product-audit". Inspect the command and pinned source before running it.

Which Agent platforms does the source record declare?

The pinned source record declares support for: claude code.

Which permission-related actions were detected?

Static rules flagged read-files in the source; the page lists the matching lines and excerpts.

Alternatives

Compare before choosing

Computed 9880

vasilyu1983/AI-Agents-public

research-git

Scans public GitHub repos for agent skills, dev practices, and code patterns. Use when enriching skills, setting team policy, or researching a build domain.

Computed 97147

oaustegard/claude-skills

orchestrating-agents

Orchestrates parallel API instances, delegated sub-tasks, and multi-agent workflows with streaming and tool-enabled delegation patterns. Routes by surface — native subagents in Cowork and Claude Code, httpx fan-out on claude.ai — and covers Gemini delegation via the Cloudflare AI Gateway on every surface. Use for parallel analysis, multi-perspective reviews, or complex task decomposition.

Computed 9564

Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills

plugin-creator

Use when creating a new Claude Code plugin from scratch — orchestrates prerequisite check, user discussion, parallel research, design with verification, atomic implementation, multi-layer validation, documentation, and final verification. For existing plugin improvement, use /plugin-creator:plugin-lifecycle instead.

Computed 956

mgiovani/cc-arsenal

create-skill

Create a new agent skill (or Claude Code slash command) from a plain-language description, using live spec fetching, pattern research, and an approval-gated blueprint before any files are written. Use whenever the user wants to build, scaffold, or author a new skill, subagent capability, or slash command, including phrasings like 'make a command for X', 'create a slash command', 'turn this into a reusable skill', or 'package this workflow as a skill'. Not for editing CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md memory r