Checks requirements.txt, pyproject.toml, and package.json dependency manifests for surface-level direct-dependency footguns: standard-library shadowing pins, abandoned backports, unpinned dependencies, and obvious intra-manifest conflicts, plus opt-in PyPI yanked releases. Use when the user asks to check a manifest for dependency problems, asks why dependencies won't install or whether anything is wrong with their dependencies, wants a dependency autopsy, or suspects dependency manifest rot. Runs offline by default as a local tool for the user's own project, not repository CI.
75
93%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Passed
No findings from the security scan
Inspect one dependency manifest on the user's machine for direct, surface-level footguns. Explain each finding in plain language, then offer a small, reviewable fix. This does not diagnose a failed pip or uv resolution.
This is a local developer tool for a project the user chooses. It is not a repository-wide lint rule, a CI gate, or a proposal to enforce dependency policy across unrelated apps.
pip-audit, npm audit, or the project's
approved security scanner for CVE coverageUse the path the user names. If no path is given and several manifests exist, ask which one to inspect. Do not sweep the repository or edit anything merely because the skill was triggered.
Supported inputs:
requirements.txtpyproject.toml using PEP 621 or common Poetry dependency tablespackage.json dependency sectionsFrom this skill directory:
python3 scripts/dep_doctor.py /path/to/requirements.txt --jsonThe default path is fully offline. It reads only the selected manifest. The report shape is:
{
"file": "/path/to/requirements.txt",
"findings": [
{
"severity": "high",
"kind": "stdlib-shadowing",
"package": "pathlib",
"line": 4,
"why": "...",
"fix": "..."
}
],
"summary": {
"total": 1,
"by_severity": {"high": 1},
"by_kind": {"stdlib-shadowing": 1},
"online": false
}
}The offline checks cover:
For package.json, Python-specific standard-library and backport checks do not
apply. The doctor still checks unpinned values and repeated dependency entries.
Read references/dependency-pitfalls.md before presenting findings. Lead with
high severity items, then medium and low. For each finding, include:
Do not call every range a conflict. The deterministic core reports conflicting constraints only when exact pins disagree. Compatible constraints split across multiple lines are duplicate entries that should be combined.
If there are no findings, say what was checked and note the limits. A clean report is not a CVE audit or a full dependency resolver.
The online check sends package names and exact pinned versions to pypi.org.
Ask for permission before enabling it, even if the user previously requested an
offline diagnosis.
python3 scripts/dep_doctor.py /path/to/requirements.txt --json --onlineIt reports an exact Python release only when every file for that release is marked yanked. Network failures become low-severity findings instead of hiding the offline diagnosis.
After explaining the report, offer a focused edit. Wait for approval before changing the manifest.
After any approved edit, rerun the offline diagnosis and the project's existing install or test command. Do not introduce a new CI gate.
scripts/dep_doctor.py: stdlib-only manifest parser and diagnosis enginereferences/dependency-pitfalls.md: reasoning guide for the reported risks9848ec8
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.