菜单
Audit site navigation — find dead-end features, missing backlinks, and poor discoverability. Produces an improvement list, no code changes.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
| name | nav-audit |
| description | Audit site navigation — find dead-end features, missing backlinks, and poor discoverability. Produces an improvement list, no code changes. |
| argument-hint | all | teams | admin | profile | consent | governance |
Audit every feature to verify it's reachable through obvious UI paths. Produces an improvement list — does NOT make changes.
| Severity | Meaning |
|---|---|
| SHOWSTOPPER | Feature only reachable by typing the URL directly. |
| POOR | Reachable but path is non-obvious, buried, or link text is unclear. |
| MISSING BACKLINK | No link from a listing/parent page to its detail/action page. |
| SUGGESTION | Works but could be improved (shortcut, breadcrumb, contextual button). |
Audit each route for the role that should use it. Hidden admin features are correct, not bugs.
| Role | Sees |
|---|---|
| Unauthenticated | Public pages (home, login) |
| Authenticated (no approval) | Membership gate (profile setup, consent) |
| Active member | Full member experience |
| Lead | Team admin for their teams |
| Board | Admin panel subset, member approval |
| Admin | Full admin panel, configuration |
Scan for all controller actions and Razor pages — URL, HTTP method, required auth, purpose.
Sources:
src/Humans.Web/Controllers/*.cs — [Route], [HttpGet], [HttpPost], [Authorize] attributessrc/Humans.Web/Pages/**/*.cshtml — Razor pagessrc/Humans.Web/Views/**/*.cshtml — MVC viewsFor each route, find inbound links in:
_Layout.cshtml, _AdminLayout.cshtml, sidebar partials<a>, asp-action, asp-controller, asp-page tag helpersFor each route determine:
Verify multi-step workflows have clear navigation: form submit lands somewhere useful, list action buttons are visible, success pages link back to the relevant list.
Output sections in order: Route Inventory (totals by role), then four issue tables (SHOWSTOPPERS / POOR Discoverability / MISSING BACKLINKS / SUGGESTIONS), each with columns: Route | Feature | Problem/Current Path | Suggested Fix. Close with a counts summary.
Present the report. Do NOT make code changes until the user approves specific items.
If $ARGUMENTS specifies a section, audit only that area:
all (default) — entire siteteams — team browsing, joining, team adminadmin — admin panel navigationprofile — profile, email, privacy, contact fieldsconsent — legal documents and consent flowgovernance — asociado application flowRefresh drift-prone documentation against current code. Reads docs/architecture/freshness-catalog.yml, diffs against the last sweep's upstream/main anchor, regenerates mechanical entries, processes editorial markers, and opens one PR per sweep with a report file.
Autonomous themed tech-debt cleanup. Reads docs/architecture/debt-ledger.yml, rotates to the least-recently-served debt theme, works it for a time budget (default 2h) or until drained, opens one PR, and asks judgment questions inline at the end. Use for daily debt burndown without Peter pointing at a target: grandfathered analyzer rules, architecture-test baselines, obsolete-field reads, cross-section stitching.
Promote QA → production by opening a PR from peterdrier/Humans:main to nobodies-collective/Humans:main with a properly-qualified commit summary. Use when the user says "PR to production", "promote to prod", "PR from origin to upstream", "prod PR", or any variation of pushing batched fork changes upstream. Always use this skill for the two-remote promotion flow even if the user doesn't say "prod" explicitly.
Run multiple Reforge-guided section-refactor lanes in parallel, each in its own worktree/branch off origin/main, with a score-blind adversarial review panel gating every commit, one draft PR per section. Use when the user wants to reduce Reforge surface/internal score across several sections at once via architecturally-correct deletions (dead surface, entity-leak removal, cross-section read-splits) — not by relocation, parameter bags, or accessibility-dodging. Wraps the per-lane process in .codex/skills/humans-refactor. Triggers: 'refactor swarm', 'parallel section refactors', 'run reforge refactor on Users/Tickets/...', 'burn down surface score across sections'. Has an intensity dial (light|standard|deep) and a workflow|solo execution mode to trade token burn against autonomy per unit of output.
Three-axis orchestrator: (1) clean section boundaries — naming, routes, views, ViewModels, DB ownership, cross-section access; (2) internal cohesion — no EF in service layer, caching in service only, proper interfaces, reusable ViewComponents, architecture-test coverage; (3) focused tests — grouped under the section, covering invariants/negatives/triggers, pruned of redundancy. Push-and-bot-review loop. Use when a sizable PR landed, a section shows arch drift, or /pr-review returned a non-trivial violation list. Camps is the gold-standard reference.
Introduce the cross-section read interface boundary (I<Section>ServiceRead) for one section's service per memory/architecture/section-read-write-split.md. Audits the surface, evaluates which methods belong on the read interface, creates a worktree, dispatches a subagent that introduces the interface and migrates non-section callers, opens a PR. Use when the user says 'read split for X', 'split <Section>Service', 'add I<Section>ServiceRead boundary', 'apply the section-read-write-split rule to <Section>', or any variation of carving the cross-section read surface out of a section's full service interface. Reference implementation is Teams (PR 678). Operates on one section per invocation.