// Lightweight read-only audit. Use host-appropriate review coverage for evidence and findings. Iterate on disagreement or low confidence. No code changes.
Use for complex or high-risk implementation work that needs plan-first execution, explicit verification design, pre-code review, and autonomous post-implementation hardening through self-test, simplify, and review-loop.
Prove the requested goal works on the highest-signal affected surface before closing. Default closing behavior for every implementation task — not just when explicitly asked. Also triggers on: 'make sure it works', 'test it yourself', 'don't just tell me it's done', 'I don't want to test this'.
Post-implementation review/fix loop. Use host-appropriate review coverage on your implementation, fix issues, iterate until highly confident, then commit.
Iteratively clarify requirements for a new task until reaching 90%+ confidence, then auto-invoke plan-loop.
Orchestrate complex tasks with agent teams. Clarify requirements, plan with dual-model review, implement with TeamCreate, simplify, review, and ship.
Audit agent skills in a repo against best practices — checks .claude/skills/ and .agents/skills/ for quality, structure, and coverage gaps. Use when the user wants to review, improve, or evaluate their skills, or when they mention skill quality, skill audit, or skill best practices.
| name | audit-loop |
| description | Lightweight read-only audit. Use host-appropriate review coverage for evidence and findings. Iterate on disagreement or low confidence. No code changes. |
Read-only audit with review coverage appropriate to the current host. No code changes.
Planning before implementation → use plan-loop instead.
Reviewing completed code changes → use review-loop instead.
Read ~/dev/agent-guards/AGENTS.md before starting — the safety and workflow conventions that govern all agent work.
references/review-protocol.md. Spin up all review agents in parallel using the host-specific coverage rules. Pre-warm any deferred tools only when the selected host path actually needs them.Every meaningful claim must cite specific files, commands, or source material.
After each round, assess confidence 0-100 with top unknowns and what evidence is still missing: