| name | audit |
| description | Reviews the changes (the diff) as a senior engineer against the spec, looking at scope, correctness, simplicity and consistency. Use it before committing or merging, when a review of the code or the diff is requested. |
Audit: senior review of the diff
Review the changed files (or the given target) the way a senior engineer would, against the spec. Ideally it runs in a fresh context / separate session, so it isn't the same agent reviewing its own work.
Evaluate in this order:
1. Scope (first)
- Did it touch anything in the spec's "Do not touch" or "Out of scope"? If so, flag it: that's the most serious.
- Did it do more than asked (features, abstractions, dependencies nobody requested)?
2. Correctness
- Uncovered edge cases, obvious bugs, error handling.
3. Simplicity
- Is it over-engineered? Can it be shorter without losing clarity? Unnecessary abstractions?
4. Consistency
- Does it follow the patterns in
CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md and the rest of the repo? Is it idiomatic?
Output:
- If there are problems: a list with file:line + the concrete fix.
- If it's fine: say so briefly and move on.
Be constructive, don't nitpick. Focus on what matters: bugs, scope, clarity, maintainability. Don't suggest changes just for the sake of it.
