Menú
Reviews readability, naming conventions, and clarity, flagging confusing identifiers and structure. Use when auditing for readability, naming consistency, or style.
Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.
Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC
Reviews API and infrastructure security configuration, including endpoints, headers, transport, and deployment settings. Use when auditing API or infrastructure hardening.
Conducts a comprehensive authentication security review covering login, sessions, tokens, and credential handling. Use when auditing authentication for vulnerabilities.
Analyzes authorization and access-control logic across routes and resources for privilege and enforcement flaws. Use when auditing authorization, RBAC, or access control.
Analyzes business logic for security flaws such as workflow bypasses, race conditions, and abuse cases. Use when reviewing application logic for exploitable behavior.
Detects duplicated and near-duplicate code across the codebase and suggests consolidation. Use when reviewing for copy-paste code, repeated logic, or DRY violations.
Analyzes code complexity and adherence to quality standards, flagging overly complex functions and metric outliers. Use when auditing maintainability, cyclomatic complexity, or coding-standard compliance.
| name | readability-and-naming |
| description | Reviews readability, naming conventions, and clarity, flagging confusing identifiers and structure. Use when auditing for readability, naming consistency, or style. |
| license | CC0-1.0 |
| metadata | {"category":"code-quality"} |
| allowed-tools | Read Grep Glob Write |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
| argument-hint | [path or scope] |
Target: $ARGUMENTS
If no target path is given above, review the entire codebase.
Evaluate our code for readability and naming.
Review:
NAMING CONVENTIONS
NAMING CONSISTENCY
CODE READABILITY
FUNCTION SIGNATURES
In the audit report, document a naming convention guide based on findings.
A structured finding report
A scale of 1/10 on how important each finding is
Remediation: precise code-level fix or config change (snippets welcome) if possible
Be concrete and cite exact code locations and identifiers.
Prefer minimal, drop-in fix snippets over prose.
Do not invent files or functions that aren’t present; if context is missing, mark as Unable to verify and say what code would prove it.
Write this into a markdown file and place it in the audits/ folder.
