| name | repo-doctor |
| description | Audit a repo's agent-facing documentation layer and dispatch the right fix — instruction-file topology (AGENTS.md canonical? CLAUDE.md/GEMINI.md @import it?), always-loaded token cost, CodeMap freshness and line-number accuracy, broken pointers, changelog-vs-code version drift. Read-only; reports first, then offers remediation in dependency order. Use when asked to "check this repo", "audit the agent docs", "is my CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md set up right", "are the docs stale", "check the code map", "health check this project", or when onboarding an unfamiliar repo and you want to know whether its docs can be trusted. Also on /repo-doctor. NOT for code review, tests, dependency or security audits. |
Repo Doctor
Diagnose the docs an agent actually reads. This skill is the triage layer
over four remediation skills — it decides what is wrong and in what order
to fix it; the other skills do the fixing.
| Axis | Question | Owner |
|---|
| Topology | Is AGENTS.md canonical, with CLAUDE.md/GEMINI.md as @import pointers? | unify-agents-md |
| Content | Is the always-loaded context rightsized? | claude-md-optimizer |
| Accuracy | Is Docs/CodeMap.md fresh and are its line numbers real? | update-code-map |
| Currency | Do the changelog and the code agree on the version? | version-manager |
Order matters
Topology → content → accuracy → currency. Never reorder these:
- Rightsizing a
CLAUDE.md that is about to be replaced by an @import
pointer throws the work away. Unify first.
- A CodeMap rebuild is the most expensive step (many agents, real tokens). Run
it after the cheap structural fixes, and only once.
If the repo has CLAUDE.md but no AGENTS.md, say so plainly and offer
/unify-agents-md before anything else — non-Claude CLIs (Codex, Copilot,
agy, Pi) read AGENTS.md and are currently running with no repo rules at all.
Process
1. Measure (never guess)
python3 ~/.claude/skills/repo-doctor/audit.py --repo <abs-path>
Add --json for machine-readable output, --sample N to change how many
CodeMap claims get spot-checked (default 40), --seed N for reproducibility.
Exit code 0 = clean, 1 = findings.
The script is the source of truth for everything measurable: file sizes,
@import wiring, CodeMap age, sampled line-number accuracy, broken pointers,
version drift. Do not estimate any of these yourself.
2. Read what the script cannot
The script measures shape, not substance. Skim the instruction files and judge:
- Content the model can already observe (folder trees, tech stack, standard
build commands) — that is deletable weight.
- Absolute bans that a Claude 5 model could reason through, versus genuine
hard rules (credentials, destructive operations, compliance) that stay verbatim.
- Repo-specific gotchas — the non-obvious traps. These are the highest-value
content and are usually under-represented. If the file has none, that is a
finding worth reporting even though no automated check catches it.
3. Report, then offer
Lead with the verdict and the single most consequential finding. Present the
recommended order and ask which to run — do not start a CodeMap rebuild
unprompted; it is expensive.
When the user agrees, invoke the remediation skills one at a time, in order,
and re-run audit.py at the end to confirm the findings actually cleared.
Interpreting results
accuracy=unmeasurable — the CodeMap exists but is not in the
update-code-map format (no **Path**: blocks or file.py:NNN claims), so
claims could not be extracted. Report it as "cannot verify", never as "fine".- Accuracy below 90% with a recent timestamp is worse than a stale map:
it means the map was written from estimates rather than an extractor.
- Token caps (soft 2,500 / hard 5,000) are guidance, not law. A repo with
genuinely unusual constraints can justify more — say so rather than cutting
content that earns its place.
- A repo that is a config mirror, asset store, or docs-only project may
legitimately have no
AGENTS.md and no CodeMap. Use judgment; do not file
findings against a repo that has no code to navigate.
Scope
Covers only the agent-facing documentation layer. It does not review code,
run tests, or audit dependencies or security — say so if asked to conflate them,
and point at /code-review, /security-review, or scan-source instead.
