CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

audit

Use when the user wants a code review on recent changes — quality, spec, security, or performance feedback. Triggers a multi-level (L1-L5) review with a standalone Reviewer; on NEEDS_FIX, offers to apply findings via /hyperflow:plan. Trigger with /hyperflow:audit, "review this change", "review my PR", "audit the diff", "code review".

Quality

87%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

81%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A thorough, highly actionable orchestration skill with excellent workflow sequencing, validation gates, and error handling, backed by a real one-level-deep reference bundle. Its main cost is token weight: the body repeats its own workflow across four redundant sections and inlines fine-grained memory-compaction policy that belongs in a reference file.

Suggestions

Collapse the four altitude passes into one: keep the 'Flow' section and the 'Per-Step Agent Map' table, and delete the bottom 'Overview', 'Instructions', and 'Output' sections that restate them (saves ~30 lines with no information loss).

Move the Step 4d curation rules and four compaction trigger/action blocks into memory-system.md, leaving a 3-4 line summary in the body ('curate up to 3 Critical/Important patterns into anti-patterns.md; compaction policy per memory-system.md').

Merge the 'Hand-off' section into Step 6/the fix gate since both describe the same PASS/NEEDS_FIX/SECURITY_VIOLATION decision paths.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The operational detail itself is efficient (no explanations of concepts Claude already knows), but the body makes four passes over the same workflow at different altitudes — the 'Per-Step Agent Map' table, the full 'Flow' section, the 'Instructions' summary, and the bottom 'Overview' section — plus 'Output' repeats 'Output Format' and 'Hand-off' repeats Step 6. That is more than 'minor instances of over-explanation' (4) but the bulk is genuinely load-bearing instruction rather than padding (2).

3 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable guidance throughout: exact paths ('.hyperflow/audits/<YYYY-MM-DD-HHmm>-<scope-slug>.md'), exact commands ('git diff HEAD' + 'git diff --staged'), the exact Skill invocation ('skill: plan, args: "session=one spec=.hyperflow/specs/audit-<YYYY-MM-DD>-<scope-slug>.md"'), verbatim fix-gate option text, exact output blocks, and a concrete markdown entry format for anti-patterns. Common cases are covered copy-paste ready.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Six steps clearly sequenced with sub-phases and parallelism marked (P1), explicit validation checkpoints (2d aggregate coverage gate, per-sub-phase Reviewer verdicts, 4a/4b/4c/4d Reviewer checks, Step 5 severity reconciliation), bounded feedback loops ('re-dispatch only 2a', 'max 2 retries', 'max 1 retry'), verdict enums, and a full error-handling table. The fix gate is a hard user checkpoint before any destructive change, so the destructive-operation cap does not apply.

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: all six references/ files exist, are topically matched, clearly signaled by name, and one level deep; worked examples were deliberately moved out to examples.md. Not 5 because ~40 lines of Step 4d curation/compaction policy are inlined in the body where memory-system.md is the natural home, and the redundant Overview/Instructions/Output sections dilute the overview role of the body.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

91%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong description: third-person, concise, explicit about both what the skill does and when to use it, with multiple natural trigger phrases and slash-command invocation. The only weaknesses are minor — target-type coverage in the what-clause and modest overlap risk on the generic 'code review' trigger.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — 'code review on recent changes — quality, spec, security, or performance feedback', 'multi-level (L1-L5) review with a standalone Reviewer', 'offers to apply findings via /hyperflow:plan' — but does not enumerate accepted target types (commit, branch, PR) in the description itself, a minor coverage gap. Not 5 because coverage stops just short of comprehensive; not 3 because far more than 1-2 actions are named.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ('Triggers a multi-level (L1-L5) review with a standalone Reviewer; on NEEDS_FIX, offers to apply findings via /hyperflow:plan') and when ('Use when the user wants a code review on recent changes' plus 'Trigger with …' phrases). Clear what + when with concrete trigger phrases is exactly the level-5 anchor; the 'Use when' clause is present so no cap applies.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Concrete trigger phrases span the natural request space — 'review this change', 'review my PR', 'audit the diff', 'code review', plus the '/hyperflow:audit' slash command — giving comprehensive synonym coverage (change/PR/diff/review/audit) for this domain. This matches the 'comprehensive coverage of natural terms including synonyms' anchor better than the 'a few natural terms missing' anchor at 4.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'code review' and 'review my PR' are commonly claimed triggers that could overlap with other review/quality skills, but the L1-L5 multi-level framing, the NEEDS_FIX fix-gate chain into '/hyperflow:plan', and the '/hyperflow:audit' command give it a mostly distinct niche. Not 5 because the generic 'code review' phrase alone could plausibly fire other review skills; not 3 because the hyperflow-specific behavior keeps conflict risk minor.

4 / 5

Total

18

/

20

Passed

Validation

81%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 7 suspicious

Warning

Total

13

/

16

Passed

Repository

jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

Path

plugins/ai-agency/hyperflow/skills/audit/SKILL.md

Reviewed

Table of Contents

Is this your skill?

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.