| name | audit-tools |
| description | Audit tools/ for structure, tests, CLI quality, and docs. Use when checking tool health, validating tools, or after adding a tool. Also 'check the tools', 'which tools need work'. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Grep, Glob, Bash |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
| argument-hint | [tool-name] [--fix] |
Tools Audit
Goal: surface every tool in tools/ that is missing files, under-documented, untested, or has a broken CLI surface, by running the 10 checks in CHECKS.md against each tool and reporting a severity-grouped result per tool plus a fleet summary. Report only — findings go to a human. Also the right skill for reviewing tool quality after modifying a tool, and for questions like "are our tools documented".
Repo Context Probe
If .claude/skill-context/audit-tools.md exists, read it and honor its declarations; otherwise use the generic defaults described below.
The context file is where a repo declares its CLI-naming convention (e.g. a valor-* entry-point prefix) and its skill-scaffolding command, so the [cli-registered] check and the "missing structure" next-step name the repo's real conventions. When the file is absent, the generic baseline applies: a tool is "cli-registered" when it has a console-script entry in pyproject.toml [project.scripts] under any name, and missing structure is scaffolded by hand.
Quick start
If $ARGUMENTS names a specific tool (e.g., /audit-tools sms_reader), audit only that tool. Otherwise audit all tools.
Step 1: Discover tools
ls -d tools/*/ | grep -v __pycache__ | grep -v _template | sort
Step 2: Run checks
Read CHECKS.md for the full check definitions. For each tool, run all 10 checks and record PASS/WARN/FAIL per check.
Step 3: Report
Present findings using this format:
## Tools Audit Report
### tool-name (6/10 PASS, 3 WARN, 1 FAIL)
#### FAIL
- [test-coverage] 3 capabilities in manifest, only 1 has test coverage (search, analyze untested)
#### WARN
- [cli-help] --help output is 2 lines — should describe arguments, options, and examples
- [error-docs] README has no error handling section
- [output-types] Functions return untyped dicts — return types not documented
#### PASS
- [manifest-exists] manifest.json present and valid
- [readme-exists] README.md present with required sections
- [tests-exist] tests/ directory with test_sms_reader.py
- [inputs-documented] All public functions have typed parameters
- [examples] README has working code examples
- [cli-registered] Registered in pyproject.toml [project.scripts] (under the repo's CLI-naming convention; see the repo context file if present)
---
### Summary
| Status | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Fully compliant | 12 |
| Has warnings | 5 |
| Has failures | 3 |
Total: 20 tools, 164/200 checks passing
Step 4: Disposition
This audit is report only — findings are presented for human review. If --fix was passed, create a GitHub issue with the full report for tracking.
After the audit
This skill produces findings only. Next steps are decided by the human:
- Fix individual tools based on findings
- Create GitHub issues for tools that need significant work
- Scaffold missing structure for incomplete tools using the repo's skill/tool scaffolding command if its context file declares one (otherwise scaffold by hand)
- Delete tools that are abandoned (e.g., empty placeholders)
