skills/12-pedrohcgs-claude-code-my-workflow/dot-claude/skills/deep-audit/SKILL.md
Deep consistency audit of the entire repository infrastructure. Launches 4 parallel specialist agents to find factual errors, code bugs, count mismatches, and cross-document inconsistencies. Then fixes all issues and loops until clean. Use when: after making broad changes, before releases, or when user says "audit", "find inconsistencies", "check everything".
npx skillsauth add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Agent-Skills-for-Empirical-Research deep-auditInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Run a comprehensive consistency audit across the entire repository, fix all issues found, and loop until clean.
Launch these 4 agents simultaneously using Task with subagent_type=general-purpose:
Focus: guide/workflow-guide.qmd
Focus: .claude/hooks/*.py and .claude/hooks/*.sh
/tmp/ usage (should use ~/.claude/sessions/)[:8] across all hooks)try/except with sys.exit(0))from __future__ import annotations for Python 3.8+ compatibilitysource not type for SessionStart)Focus: .claude/skills/*/SKILL.md and .claude/rules/*.md
disable-model-invocation: trueallowed-tools values are sensiblepaths: reference existing directoriestemplates/Focus: README.md, docs/index.html, docs/workflow-guide.html
Categorize each finding:
Common false alarms to watch for:
## Title inside ::: divs — this is standard syntax, NOT a heading bugallowed-tools linter warning — known linter bug (Claude Code issue #25380), field IS validApply fixes in parallel where possible. For each fix:
If guide/workflow-guide.qmd was modified:
quarto render guide/workflow-guide.qmd
cp guide/workflow-guide.html docs/workflow-guide.html
After fixing, launch a fresh set of 4 agents to verify.
Max loops: 5 (to prevent infinite cycling)
These are real bugs found across 7 rounds — check for these specifically:
| Bug Pattern | Where to Check | What Went Wrong |
|-------------|---------------|-----------------|
| Stale counts ("19 skills" → "21") | Guide, README, landing page | Added skills but didn't update all mentions |
| Hook exit codes | All Python hooks | Exit 2 in PreCompact silently discards stdout |
| Hook field names | post-compact-restore.py | SessionStart uses source, not type |
| State in /tmp/ | All Python hooks | Should use ~/.claude/sessions/<hash>/ |
| Hash length mismatch | All Python hooks | Some used [:12], others [:8] |
| Missing fail-open | Python hooks __main__ | Unhandled exception → exit 1 → confusing behavior |
| Python 3.10+ syntax | Type hints like dict | None | Need from __future__ import annotations |
| Missing directories | quality_reports/specs/ | Referenced in rules but never created |
| Always-on rule listing | Guide + README | meta-governance omitted from listings |
| macOS-only commands | Skills, rules | open without xdg-open fallback |
| Protected file blocking | settings.json edits | protect-files.sh blocks Edit/Write |
After each round, report:
## Round N Audit Results
### Issues Found: X genuine, Y false alarms
| # | Severity | File | Issue | Status |
|---|----------|------|-------|--------|
| 1 | Critical | file.py:42 | Description | Fixed |
| 2 | Medium | file.qmd:100 | Description | Fixed |
### Verification
- [ ] No stale counts (grep confirms)
- [ ] All hooks have fail-open + future annotations
- [ ] Guide renders successfully
- [ ] docs/ updated
### Result: [CLEAN | N issues remaining]
development
Conduct rigorous thematic analysis (TA) of qualitative data following Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase framework. Use whenever the user mentions 'thematic analysis', 'TA', 'Braun and Clarke', 'qualitative coding', 'identifying themes', or asks for help analysing interviews, focus groups, open-ended survey responses, or transcripts to identify patterns. Also trigger for questions about inductive vs theoretical coding, semantic vs latent themes, essentialist vs constructionist epistemology, building a thematic map, or writing up a qualitative findings section. Covers all six phases, the four upfront analytic decisions, the 15-point quality checklist, and the five common pitfalls. Produces a Word document write-up and an annotated thematic map. Does NOT cover IPA, grounded theory, discourse analysis, conversation analysis, or narrative analysis — use a different method for those.
development
Guide users through writing a systematic literature review (SLR) following the PRISMA 2020 framework. Use this skill whenever the user mentions 'systematic review', 'systematic literature review', 'SLR', 'PRISMA', 'PRISMA 2020', 'PRISMA flow diagram', 'PRISMA checklist', or asks for help writing, structuring, or auditing a literature review that follows reporting guidelines. Also trigger when the user asks about inclusion/exclusion criteria for a review, search strategies for databases like Scopus/WoS/PubMed, study selection processes, risk of bias assessment, or narrative synthesis for a review paper. This skill covers the full PRISMA 2020 checklist (27 items), produces a Word document manuscript in strict journal article format, generates an annotated PRISMA flow diagram, and enforces APA 7th Edition referencing throughout. It does NOT cover meta-analysis or statistical pooling. By Chuah Kee Man.
testing
Performs placebo-in-time sensitivity analysis with hierarchical null model and optional Bayesian assurance. Use when checking model robustness, verifying lack of pre-intervention effects, or estimating study power.
data-ai
Fit, summarize, plot, and interpret a chosen CausalPy experiment. Use after the causal method has been selected, including when configuring PyMC/sklearn models and scale-aware custom priors.