agentic-audit

name	agentic-audit
description	Audit a project's agentic instruction files (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, .cursor/rules, .cursorrules, .github/copilot-instructions.md, Windsurf, Aider) and Claude Code settings (.claude/settings.json, .claude/settings.local.json) against an opinionated baseline covering project context coverage, operational guidance, settings hygiene, and multi-agent drift. Static-only with optional implementation plan. Use when this capability is needed.
metadata	{"author":"CW-Codewalnut"}

/agentic-audit

Audit a project's agentic instruction files and Claude Code settings against an opinionated baseline organised in four layers — project context coverage, operational guidance and conventions, Claude Code settings hygiene, multi-agent consistency and drift — preceded by a diagnostic snapshot. Then offer to generate an implementation plan for the gaps.

The default mental model is a TypeScript and React application with a CLAUDE.md at the repository root and a .claude/ directory, but the audit recognises the wider ecosystem of agentic instruction files (AGENTS.md, .cursor/rules/*.mdc, .cursorrules, .github/copilot-instructions.md, .windsurfrules, .aider.conf.yml and CONVENTIONS.md) and grades whatever is present.

How this differs from neighbouring audits

Concern	Owner
Whether the README explains the project for humans	/documentation-audit (Layer 1 onboarding)
Whether the architecture overview document exists for humans	/documentation-audit (Layer 2 architectural docs)
Whether CLAUDE.md (or equivalent) gives an agent the context it needs	/agentic-audit (Layer 1 project context coverage)
Whether agentic instruction files describe build/test/lint commands	/agentic-audit (Layer 2 operational guidance)
Whether .claude/settings.json has safe permissions and no secrets	/agentic-audit (Layer 3 settings hygiene)
Whether pre-commit and CI hooks are configured	/quality-gates-audit
Whether CLAUDE.md and AGENTS.md and .cursorrules agree with each other and with package.json	/agentic-audit (Layer 4 multi-agent consistency and drift)
Whether public APIs carry TSDoc or JSDoc	/documentation-audit (Layer 3 code-level documentation)
Whether secrets appear in committed source files generally	/security-audit

/documentation-audit covers documentation written for humans. /agentic-audit covers documentation and configuration written for AI coding agents. The two overlap in places (a project-purpose paragraph helps both audiences), and both surface the gap so a single fix passes both.

Static-only design

This skill is read-only. It only reads files in the repository: agentic instruction files, .claude/settings.json, .claude/settings.local.json, .gitignore, package.json, and a sample of source files for cross-referencing. It never writes to the codebase, never runs project commands, never makes network requests, and never authenticates anywhere.

Usage

/agentic-audit                                            # default: concise Top 5 + full report saved + ask about plan
/agentic-audit --worktree                          # create an isolated Git worktree, then run the audit there
/agentic-audit --learn                                    # mid-level engineer teaching mode (detailed explanations + file/line examples)
/agentic-audit --teach                                    # alias for --learn
/agentic-audit --threshold-instruction-min-lines=40       # override default 25
/agentic-audit --threshold-instruction-max-lines=600      # override default 400
/agentic-audit --threshold-permission-broadness=10        # override default 5 (count of broad-pattern permissions tolerated)
/agentic-audit --threshold-context-coverage=70            # override default 60 (percent of essential context items present)

💡 Pro tip: Add --worktree to run this audit in an isolated Git worktree.

The skill never accepts --apply. The implementation plan is descriptive Markdown.

The opinionated baseline

A check resolves to one of four statuses:

• present — the invariant holds.
• partial — most signals resolve, with a small number of exceptions, or the project shows mixed adherence to a soft check.
• missing — a structural prerequisite is absent (no agentic instruction file at all, for example).
• violation — the audit identified a concrete problem that breaks the invariant (a secret in settings.json, a broad permission pattern, a stale command reference).

Layer 0 is informational only and has no status. Layer 3's settings checks are silently skipped when neither .claude/settings.json nor .claude/settings.local.json exists. Layer 4's drift checks always run.

Layer 0 — Diagnostic snapshot (always written, no pass/fail)

• Detected agentic instruction files, with one row per file: path, line count, last-modified date (from Git), and recognised tool family (claude, cursor, cursor-rules-directory, cursorrules-legacy, copilot, windsurf, aider, agents-md, conventions-md, other).
• Total agentic-instruction line count across all detected files.
• Agentic instruction file count.
• .claude/ directory presence.
• .claude/settings.json presence, shape (top-level keys), and total permission entry count.
• .claude/settings.local.json presence and .gitignore status.
• Detected hook count (per event: PreToolUse, PostToolUse, Stop, Notification, etc.).
• Detected MCP-server count (when mcpServers block is present in any settings file).
• Detected status-line, environment-variable, and model-override entries.
• Project shape (informs phrasing in the implementation plan): deployable application, library, monorepo, or hybrid.

Layer 1 — Project context coverage

The agentic instruction file's job is to give an AI agent the same context a new engineer would get from a one-page brief. The audit checks that the primary instruction file (the most-substantive of CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, .cursorrules, or the equivalent) covers the essential items.

Check	Expectation	Violation signal
Primary instruction file present	At least one of CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, .cursorrules, or .cursor/rules/*.mdc exists at the repository root (or equivalent canonical path).	No agentic instruction file at all.
Primary instruction file is substantive	The primary file is at least the threshold lines (default 25; tunable via --threshold-instruction-min-lines) and contains identifiable structure beyond a single bullet list.	Primary file below the threshold.
Primary instruction file is not bloated	The primary file is at most the threshold lines (default 400; tunable via --threshold-instruction-max-lines). Agent context windows are precious; instruction files compete with the user's actual problem for tokens.	Primary file above the threshold.
Project purpose documented	The instruction file states what the project is and who it is for in identifiable prose (not just a project name).	No purpose statement.
Tech stack documented	The instruction file names the primary framework, language, and runtime (e.g. "TypeScript, React 19, Next.js 15, Node 22"). Soft check — reported as partial when only some are mentioned.	No tech-stack signals at all.
Architectural mental model documented	The instruction file gives a brief architectural orientation: directory layout, the dominant module pattern (feature folders, layered, hexagonal), or links to ARCHITECTURE.md. Soft check.	No architectural orientation.
Domain glossary present where appropriate	When the project uses domain-specific terminology (detected by frequency of capitalised non-English-dictionary tokens in source filenames, or by the presence of a glossary.md), the instruction file defines or links to a glossary. Soft check. Skipped when no domain terminology is detected.	Heavy domain terminology with no glossary.
Links to canonical human-facing docs	The instruction file points the agent at the README, ARCHITECTURE.md, ADR directory, and CONTRIBUTING.md when those exist. Soft check — reported as partial when some are linked and others are not.	None of the canonical docs are linked.

Layer 2 — Operational guidance and conventions

Check	Expectation	Violation signal
Build, test, and run commands documented	The instruction file lists the canonical install, dev-server, test, and build commands (or links to a section that does). The actual commands are checked against package.json scripts in Layer 4. Soft check — reported as partial when some commands are documented and others are not.	None of the four basic commands are documented.
Code-style and naming conventions documented	The instruction file states the project's conventions: naming patterns (camelCase vs snake_case, file naming), import-ordering rules, formatting rules, abbreviations policy. Soft check.	No conventions documented in a non-trivial codebase.
Commit and branching conventions documented	The instruction file states the commit-message convention (Conventional Commits, gitmoji, plain), the branch-naming convention, and any git add policy. Soft check.	No commit conventions in a project with multiple contributors (signal: more than one Git author in recent history).
Testing philosophy or approach documented	The instruction file states the testing convention: framework, query priority (Testing Library), behaviour-over-implementation, snapshot policy. Soft check. Skipped silently when no test files are present.	Tests exist but no testing convention is documented.
"What to do" and "What NOT to do" guidance present	The instruction file contains explicit guidance for the agent: things to avoid (no git add -A, no abbreviations, no hard-coded paths), things to prefer. Soft check — present requires both positive and negative guidance, partial for one-sided guidance.	No agent-specific guidance at all.
Tone or response-style guidance present	When the project surfaces user-facing AI features (signal: dependencies on ai, @ai-sdk/*, langchain, @anthropic-ai/sdk, openai), the instruction file documents the desired response style or persona for those features. Soft check. Skipped silently when no AI surface is detected.	AI surface present; no response-style guidance.
Imperative-present rule signal	When the project requires Conventional Commits, the instruction file or a referenced doc explicitly demands the imperative-present subject form ("Add X", not "Added X"). Soft check. Skipped silently when Conventional Commits is not in use.

Layer 3 — Claude Code settings hygiene

These checks read .claude/settings.json and, when present, .claude/settings.local.json. When neither exists, the entire layer is skipped silently (the project simply has not adopted Claude Code-specific configuration). Settings checks do not rate the absence of the file as a violation; users who do not run Claude Code locally have no reason to commit a settings.json.

Check	Expectation	Violation signal
settings.json is valid JSON	When present, the file parses as JSON with no syntax errors.	Parse error.
settings.local.json is gitignored	.gitignore (at the repository root or .claude/.gitignore) excludes settings.local.json so personal overrides do not leak into the project. The committed settings.json is the shared baseline.	settings.local.json is committed or not gitignored.
No secrets in settings.json	The file contains no entries that look like API keys, tokens, passwords, or private URLs. The audit pattern-matches against common secret shapes (sk-, ghp_, xoxb-, hex strings of suspicious length, JWT-shaped strings, AWS access-key prefixes) and against keys named apiKey, token, secret, password, privateKey.	A pattern match is found.
No secrets in settings.local.json	Even though settings.local.json is local-only, secrets belong in environment variables and a secret manager — not in a JSON file on disk that other tools may index. Soft check — reported as partial when secrets are present in settings.local.json only.	Pattern match in settings.local.json.
Permissions are appropriately scoped	The permissions.allow list does not contain over-broad patterns. Broad patterns include Bash(*), Bash(* ), Edit(*), Write(*), and patterns that match every path. The audit tolerates up to the threshold count (default 5; tunable via --threshold-permission-broadness); above that, reported as violation. The audit always names the broad patterns it found.	More than the threshold count of broad patterns.
permissions.deny is non-empty in security-sensitive projects	When the project ships to production (signal: detected deployable target), the list explicitly forbids destructive commands (, , dropping production tables, mass deletion patterns). Soft check — reported as when deny is empty. Skipped silently for library-only projects.

Layer 4 — Multi-agent consistency and drift

Check	Expectation	Violation signal
Single source of truth for shared rules	When more than one agentic instruction file exists (CLAUDE.md plus AGENTS.md, or CLAUDE.md plus .cursorrules), one is the source of truth and the others either reference it explicitly ("see CLAUDE.md") or are symlinks. The audit detects symlinks and explicit cross-references. Soft check — reported as partial when the files diverge.	Files contain conflicting guidance.
Tech-stack mentions match dependencies	Frameworks and tools named in the instruction files appear in package.json (react, next, vitest, tsup). Stale mentions (a framework that is no longer a dependency) are flagged. Soft check.	Multiple stale framework references.
Commands documented match package.json scripts	Commands shown in instruction files (pnpm dev, npm run test, bun run build) reference scripts that actually exist in package.json.	An instruction-file command references a missing script.
Cross-references resolve	Internal references in instruction files (see ARCHITECTURE.md, [CONTRIBUTING.md](CONTRIBUTING.md), docs/decisions/) point at files or directories that exist. Always runs.	A referenced file is missing.
No retired-model identifiers	Instruction files do not mention model IDs that have been retired (claude-3-opus-20240229, claude-2, gpt-3.5-turbo). Soft check — reported as partial when found, since the mention is sometimes historical context.	Multiple retired-model mentions in active guidance.
Instruction-file freshness	When the project has had recent activity (signal: commits in the last 90 days), at least one agentic instruction file has been modified within the threshold (default 180 days). Soft check.	All instruction files older than the threshold in an active project.
No abbreviations in agentic prose (when project requires it)

What this skill does

1. Reads the knowledge graph when present. Soft dependency: when graphify-out/graph.json exists, the audit cross-references the directory layout described in the instruction files against the actual top-level communities so stale layout descriptions surface in Layer 4.

2. Confirms the project root. Detects the presence of at least one of: package.json, .git/, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml. Without any project root signal, the skill stops and tells the user it expects to be run inside a project root.

3. Detects project shape (deployable application, library, monorepo, hybrid) for Layer 3's deploy-aware deny-list check.

4. Detects an AI surface (presence of ai, @ai-sdk/*, langchain, @anthropic-ai/sdk, or openai in dependencies) for Layer 2's tone-and-response-style check.

5. Walks every recognised agentic instruction file and classifies each by tool family. The audit recognises:

   • CLAUDE.md at repo root or any directory.
   • AGENTS.md at repo root.
   • .cursorrules at repo root.
   • .cursor/rules/*.mdc.
   • .github/copilot-instructions.md.
   • .windsurfrules.
   • .aider.conf.yml and CONVENTIONS.md (Aider).

6. Reads .claude/settings.json and .claude/settings.local.json when present. Validates JSON, walks the permissions, hooks, env, mcpServers, statusLine, and model blocks.

7. Reads .gitignore to verify settings.local.json is excluded.

8. Cross-references commands and tech-stack mentions against package.json scripts and dependencies, and cross-references file links against the file system.

Implementation steps

Step 1 — Confirm the prerequisites

Detect a project root by checking for at least one of package.json, .git/, pyproject.toml, or Cargo.toml. If none is present, print agentic-audit: no project root detected (expected one of package.json, .git, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml) and stop.

Step 2 — Detect project shape and AI surface

• Project shape: same heuristic as /documentation-audit Layer 4 (deployable, library, monorepo, hybrid).
• AI surface: scan dependencies and devDependencies for ai, @ai-sdk/*, langchain, @anthropic-ai/sdk, openai, cohere-ai, replicate. Record matches in metadata.json.

Step 3 — Discover agentic instruction files

Walk the repository (excluding node_modules, .git, and gitignored paths) for:

• CLAUDE.md at any depth.
• AGENTS.md at the repository root.
• .cursorrules at the repository root.
• .cursor/rules/*.mdc.
• .github/copilot-instructions.md.
• .windsurfrules.
• .aider.conf.yml, CONVENTIONS.md.

For each file, record path, line count, last-modified date (from git log -1 --format=%cI -- <file>), and tool family. Identify the primary file as the most-substantive (longest non-empty file among the detected set, with CLAUDE.md at the repo root preferred when present and substantive).

Step 4 — Read Claude Code settings

If .claude/settings.json exists, parse it. If parsing fails, record the parse error and continue with Layer 3 checks marked appropriately. Walk top-level keys: permissions (with allow and deny lists), hooks, env, mcpServers, statusLine, model. If .claude/settings.local.json exists, parse and walk the same keys; the local file shadows the committed file.

Step 5 — Confirm gitignore status of settings.local.json

Read .gitignore at the repository root (and any .claude/.gitignore). Confirm that settings.local.json, .claude/settings.local.json, or an equivalent pattern is present. Record the result; the Layer 3 check uses it directly.

Step 6 — Cross-reference for Layer 4

• Extract every fenced or backtick-quoted command from the agentic instruction files (pnpm dev, npm run test, bun run build, make ...). Match script-running commands against package.json scripts; record each as present, missing-script, or not-applicable (for non-script commands like git status).
• Extract every framework or tool name mentioned in instruction-file prose (heuristic: capitalised technical nouns plus a curated list — React, Next, Vitest, Vite, Bun, pnpm, Storybook, etc.) and confirm each appears in dependencies or devDependencies.
• Extract every file reference ([X](path) or see X) from instruction files and confirm the path exists.
• Detect mentioned model identifiers and compare against a list of retired identifiers maintained in this skill.

Step 7 — Build the diagnostic snapshot

Aggregate the data from steps 3–6 into the items listed in Layer 0. Write snapshot.md and prepend the same content to findings.md.

Step 8 — Resolve each check

For each check in the active layer list, walk its detection logic. Layer 3 checks are skipped silently when no .claude/settings*.json file exists. Layer 2's testing-philosophy check is skipped silently when no test files are present. Layer 2's tone-and-response-style check is skipped silently when no AI surface is detected.

For each check, record evidence and up to ten representative samples plus a total count.

Step 9 — Write phase 1 outputs

Create .architect-audits/agentic-audit/ if needed. Write findings.md, findings.json, snapshot.md, metadata.json. Overwrite previous runs of these four; preserve implementation-plan.md unless the user agrees to regenerate it.

Step 10 — Print the concise chat summary and offer phase 2

Print a human-first, scannable summary in the chat. Do not print the full layered findings — those are written to disk in Step 9. The chat output has exactly this shape:

1. Short header — audit name, timestamp, and a one-line summary of the agentic-instruction state ("two instruction files, settings.json present, three drift findings").
2. Top 5 Highest-Leverage Recommendations — ordered by blast radius and leverage: settings-hygiene risks (secrets, broad permissions) first, then context-coverage gaps (the agent literally cannot do good work without these), then operational-guidance gaps, then drift cleanup. For fewer than five findings, print what exists. For each recommendation (numbered 1–5):
   • Title (one clear line).
   • Why it matters (explain the principle in 1–2 sentences).
   • Real consequences if ignored (honest downside for the team or project).
   • Smallest high-leverage fix (exact next step, effort level, and which files to touch).
   • At the end, add a lettered sub-list of concrete actions if useful (e.g. 2a, 2b) so the user can reply with "2b" or "1 and 3" to trigger implementation.
3. Bottom line: Full detailed audit report (layered findings, snapshot, metadata, implementation plan) → .architect-audits/agentic-audit/findings.md

When --learn or --teach is set, expand each recommendation into mid-level engineer teaching mode:

• For every item, explain as if teaching a mid-level engineer, pointing to specific files and line numbers in the current project.
• Use educational language: "Here's why a bloated CLAUDE.md actively hurts agent quality…", "This is the exact mistake I see in most projects when they first adopt Claude Code…", "The fix is small but pays off huge because the agent stops re-asking for context every session…".
• Include a short "What you'll learn from fixing this" section for each recommendation.
• Keep the numbered/lettered structure so the user can still reply with "2b" or "1 and 3".
• End with the same bottom-line link to the full report.

After printing, ask the single yes-or-no question: "Generate an implementation plan for the agentic-instruction and settings gaps? (yes/no)" Do not proceed to phase 2 without an explicit affirmative.

Step 11 — Phase 2: generate the implementation plan

When the user agrees, build implementation-plan.md, ordered by impact:

1. Header — repository name, baseline version, project shape, AI-surface flag, detected agentic instruction files, timestamp, total counts per layer.
2. Settings-hygiene fixes (highest priority) — secrets to relocate (with the specific environment-variable names to use), broad permissions to tighten (with safer patterns proposed), missing permissions.deny entries for deployed projects, hook references to fix, settings.local.json gitignore entry to add. Per finding, the concrete diff to make.
3. Context-coverage fixes — sections to add to the primary instruction file: project purpose paragraph, tech-stack line, architectural mental-model paragraph, links to canonical docs, glossary stub when appropriate. Per finding, a starter snippet the user can paste.
4. Operational-guidance fixes — build/test/run commands block, code-style and naming conventions block, commit-conventions block, testing-philosophy block, agent-specific "do this / not that" block. Per finding, a starter snippet.
5. Drift fixes — instruction-file commands to update against package.json scripts, stale tech-stack mentions to remove, broken cross-references to repair, retired model identifiers to replace. Per finding, the exact substitution.
6. Closing checklist — flat checkbox list mirroring the gaps, suitable for pasting into a pull-request description.

The plan is descriptive, not executable. It does not write instruction files, edit settings, or relocate secrets.

Findings file shape

findings.json:

{
  "skillVersion": "1.0.0",
  "runStartedAt": "2026-04-29T13:47:00Z",
  "runFinishedAt": "2026-04-29T13:47:18Z",
  "projectShape": "deployable-application",
  "aiSurfaceDetected": false,
  "thresholds": {
    "instructionMinLines": 25,
    "instructionMaxLines": 400,
    "permissionBroadness": 5,
    "contextCoverage": 60
  },
  "snapshot": {
    "agenticInstructionFiles": [
      { "path": "CLAUDE.md", "lines": 142, "lastModified": "2026-04-12", "toolFamily": "claude" },
      { "path": "AGENTS.md", "lines": 38,  "lastModified": "2026-02-01", "toolFamily": "agents-md" }
    ],
    "agenticInstructionLineTotal": 180,
    "claudeDirPresent": true,
    "settingsJson": {
      "present": true,
      "topLevelKeys": ["permissions", "hooks", "env"],
      "permissionAllowCount": 31,
      "permissionDenyCount": 0
    },
    "settingsLocalJson": { "present": true, "gitignored": true },
    "hookCounts": { "PreToolUse": 1, "PostToolUse": 0, "Stop": 1, "Notification": 0 },
    "mcpServerCount": 2,
    "statusLineSet": true,
    "modelOverrideSet": false
  },
  "summary": {
    "projectContextCoverage":         { "present": 4, "partial": 2, "missing": 1, "violation": 0 },
    "operationalGuidanceAndConventions": { "present": 3, "partial": 3, "missing": 0, "violation": 1 },
    "claudeCodeSettingsHygiene":      { "present": 6, "partial": 1, "missing": 0, "violation": 2 },
    "multiAgentConsistencyAndDrift":  { "present": 4, "partial": 1, "missing": 0, "violation": 2 }
  },
  "checks": [
    {
      "layer": "claude-code-settings-hygiene",
      "check": "no-secrets-in-settings-json",
      "status": "violation",
      "evidence": [".claude/settings.json"],
      "samples": [
        { "key": "env.OPENAI_API_KEY", "matchPattern": "sk-..." }
      ],
      "totalCount": 1,
      "expectation": "settings.json contains no secret-shaped values.",
      "gap": "An OpenAI API key with the sk- prefix is committed in .claude/settings.json under env.OPENAI_API_KEY.",
      "remediation": "Move the secret to a real environment-variable manager. Replace the value in settings.json with an empty string or a reference, rotate the key, and confirm no historical commits expose it."
    }
  ]
}

findings.md mirrors the same content in human-readable form, with the diagnostic snapshot at the top and one section per check, grouped by layer. snapshot.md contains only the snapshot. metadata.json carries skill identity, timestamps, Graphify revision (when present), the project shape, the AI-surface flag, the detected agentic instruction files, and applied thresholds.

Idempotency rules

• Re-running with no flags overwrites findings.md, findings.json, snapshot.md, and metadata.json in place.
• implementation-plan.md is preserved across runs unless the user agrees to regenerate it.
• Threshold overrides are recorded in metadata.json so a partial run can be reproduced.
• Secret-pattern matches are not echoed in chat output beyond a redacted match preview (sk-…); the raw value never appears in any audit artefact.

Failure modes and remediation

Symptom	Cause	Fix
no project root detected	The skill is run outside a project root.	Change directory into the project root and re-run.
settings.json parse error	Invalid JSON committed by hand.	The audit reports the parse error and the line, then continues with the rest of Layer 3 marked missing for checks that depend on parsed contents. The user fixes the JSON and re-runs.
Multiple instruction files diverge	CLAUDE.md and .cursorrules were edited independently and now contradict each other.	The Layer 4 single-source-of-truth check reports partial or violation and the implementation plan recommends consolidating onto one file with the others either symlinked or rewritten as short pointers.
Knowledge graph missing	/pre-audit-setup has not been run.	Continue. Record noGraphify: true in metadata. The Layer 4 layout-drift check loses graph cross-referencing; instruction-file checks otherwise unaffected.
Project uses a non-Node ecosystem	Python or Rust project.	Layer 4's package.json-script-drift check is skipped silently. The other layers still run; tech-stack-mentions cross-referencing degrades to "no dependency manifest available" and reports partial rather than violation for stale mentions.
Repository is shallow-cloned	git log cannot resolve last-modified for some files.	Last-modified data is recorded as unknown for the affected files. Freshness check degrades to partial with a metadata note.
Project is monorepo with per-package CLAUDE.md	Each package has its own instruction file.	The audit treats the repo-root file as the primary and walks every per-package file as additional. Per-package files are graded against the same Layer 1 and Layer 2 baseline; results aggregate into the same findings file.
Secret-shape match is a false positive	A long hexadecimal string is a Git commit hash, not a token.	The audit reports the match with context and a redacted preview. The user reviews and dismisses the false positive; threshold tuning is not currently exposed for secret-pattern matching, so the dismissal is a human review step.

What this skill explicitly does NOT do

• Modify any agentic instruction file, settings file, or other project file.
• Generate agentic instruction content. The implementation plan describes what to write; it does not write it.
• Run any code, including commands referenced in instruction files. Drift detection compares text against package.json; it does not execute.
• Audit ~/.claude/settings.json or any other home-directory settings. Project-local settings only.
• Audit ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md or other user-private agentic instruction files. Repository-scoped files only.
• Rotate secrets, scrub Git history, or push fixes. Secret detection reports the match; the human handles rotation.
• Audit MCP-server source code or behaviour. Only the configuration shape in settings is checked.
• Audit the prompt-engineering quality of agentic instructions beyond the structural and coverage checks above. Whether a paragraph is well-phrased is a human judgement call.
• Replace human review of the agentic instruction file. The audit verifies presence and structure; whether the agent actually performs better is measured by re-running real tasks against the agent.
• Audit non-agentic AI-feature code (LLM call sites, prompt templates) inside the application source. That is owned by general code review, not by /agentic-audit.
• Audit Cursor-specific MDC frontmatter semantics (alwaysApply, globs, description) beyond confirming the file exists and is recognised. The semantic check belongs to a future Cursor-specific audit.

---

Source: CW-Codewalnut/ArchitectPlaybook — distributed by TomeVault.