repo-agent-context-audit — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited repo-agent-context-audit (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Assess whether a repository has a small, usable agent context stack: a short top-level instruction file, task-specific skills, and behavior/implementation specs for substantial work. Default to a read-only audit and minimal recommendations; create or edit high-context files only when the user explicitly asks.
If the user asks to generate, split, or apply root/scoped AGENTS.md files, handoff to agentsmd-scaffold. This skill may identify that scaffold as the smallest useful change, but should not duplicate the generation workflow.
Prefer this three-layer shape:
AGENTS.md or repo-equivalent: 80-150 lines, top-level routing only..agents/skills/<task>/SKILL.md: reusable workflows for common fragile tasks.specs/<id>/PRODUCT.md and specs/<id>/TECH.md: checked-in contracts for substantial features.Do not force this exact layout when a repo already has a coherent equivalent, such as WARP.md, CLAUDE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, or framework-specific instruction files. Map existing files to the layers first, then fill only the real gaps.
Run the read-only scanner when possible:
# From this skill directory:
python3 scripts/scan_repo_context.py <repo-root>Then inspect the important files directly. Always search before creating:
AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, WARP.md, .claude/instructions.mdCONTRIBUTING.md, README.md, .github/copilot-instructions.md.agents/skills/*/SKILL.mdspecs/**/{PRODUCT,product,TECH,tech}.mdIf multiple instruction files overlap, record their scopes and precedence instead of merging them by default.
Classify the repo into one of these states:
Use the rubric in references/standards.md for:
Lead with the smallest useful change. Good recommendations usually look like:
AGENTS.md that points to existing docs instead of duplicating them..agents/skills/write-product-spec and .agents/skills/write-tech-spec only if spec writing is repeated.specs/<id>/PRODUCT.md and TECH.md templates only if the repo ships substantial features.When the user explicitly asks to generate, split, or apply root/scoped AGENTS.md files, use agentsmd-scaffold instead of duplicating that workflow.
When the user asks for exact PRODUCT/TECH spec templates or non-AGENTS context scaffolding, read references/templates.md and adapt the templates to the repo. Before editing:
AGENTS.md or equivalent whose scope covers the target path| Case | Action |
|---|---|
| Small bugfix repo with README and clear tests | No spec system; maybe add a short AGENTS.md router |
| Repeated feature work with review churn | Add PRODUCT/TECH spec workflow |
User asks to generate or apply root/scoped AGENTS.md files | Use agentsmd-scaffold |
Existing CLAUDE.md or WARP.md is good | Link it from AGENTS.md or leave it as the repo-equivalent |
| Multiple teams or nested packages | Use scoped nested AGENTS.md only where rules genuinely differ |
| High-context file over 200 lines | Split into top-level router plus referenced skills/docs |
| User asks for bulk normalization | Audit first; do not batch edit until 2-3 repos have been manually validated |
Direct actions:
agentsmd-scaffold.Escalate before:
AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, WARP.md, hooks, settings, or generated docs.Evidence-backed pushback:
Feedback loop:
AGENTS.md just because it is missing. If CLAUDE.md, WARP.md, or CONTRIBUTING.md already works as a coherent router, recommend a pointer or no change.PRODUCT.md vs product.md, then ask before changing conventions.Return concise findings:
## Agent Context Audit
- state: <classification>
- top-level router: <present/missing/overloaded>
- reusable skills: <present/missing/not needed>
- specs: <present/missing/inconsistent/not needed>
- main risk: <one sentence>
## Smallest Useful Change
1. <change> - <why> - <estimated effort>
## Evidence
- <file>:<line> - <what it proves>
## Optional Scaffold
- <files to create or update, only if requested>scripts/scan_repo_context.py: read-only repo scanner for high-context files, skills, and specs.references/standards.md: scoring rubric and design rules. Read for audits.references/templates.md: minimal AGENTS.md, PRODUCT.md, and TECH.md templates. Read only when scaffolding or proposing exact file contents.~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.