Name: audit
Author: shipshitdev

About

Imported from shipshitdev/skills (skills/audit/SKILL.md). Install upstream with npx skills add shipshitdev/skills --skill audit. Copyright stays with the author.

Run systematic technical quality checks and generate the report below. Do not fix issues in this skill.

Before scanning, read the existing design system (CSS / tokens / theme and a representative component) so "correct" is measured against the project's own conventions, not generic defaults. If the repo carries design context (PRODUCT.md, DESIGN.md, .impeccable.md, or a ## Design Context block in .github/copilot-instructions.md), read it too.

This is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.

Diagnostic Scan

Run checks across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-4 using the criteria below.

1. Accessibility (A11y)

Check for:

Contrast issues: Text contrast ratios < 4.5:1 (or 7:1 for AAA)
Missing ARIA: Interactive elements without proper roles, labels, or states
Keyboard navigation: Missing focus indicators, illogical tab order, keyboard traps
Semantic HTML: Improper heading hierarchy, missing landmarks, divs instead of buttons
Alt text: Missing or poor image descriptions
Form issues: Inputs without labels, poor error messaging, missing required indicators

Score 0-4: 0=Inaccessible (fails WCAG A), 1=Major gaps (few ARIA labels, no keyboard nav), 2=Partial (some a11y effort, significant gaps), 3=Good (WCAG AA mostly met, minor gaps), 4=Excellent (WCAG AA fully met, approaches AAA)

2. Performance

Check for:

Layout thrashing: Reading/writing layout properties in loops
Expensive animations: Animating layout properties (width, height, top, left) instead of transform/opacity
Missing optimization: Images without lazy loading, unoptimized assets, missing will-change
Bundle size: Unnecessary imports, unused dependencies
Render performance: Unnecessary re-renders, missing memoization

Score 0-4: 0=Severe issues (layout thrash, unoptimized everything), 1=Major problems (no lazy loading, expensive animations), 2=Partial (some optimization, gaps remain), 3=Good (mostly optimized, minor improvements possible), 4=Excellent (fast, lean, well-optimized)

3. Theming

Check for:

Hard-coded colors: Colors not using design tokens
Broken dark mode: Missing dark mode variants, poor contrast in dark theme
Inconsistent tokens: Using wrong tokens, mixing token types
Theme switching issues: Values that don't update on theme change

Score 0-4: 0=No theming (hard-coded everything), 1=Minimal tokens (mostly hard-coded), 2=Partial (tokens exist but inconsistently used), 3=Good (tokens used, minor hard-coded values), 4=Excellent (full token system, dark mode works perfectly)

4. Responsive Design

Check for:

Fixed widths: Hard-coded widths that break on mobile
Touch targets: Interactive elements < 44x44px
Horizontal scroll: Content overflow on narrow viewports
Text scaling: Layouts that break when text size increases
Missing breakpoints: No mobile/tablet variants

Score 0-4: 0=Desktop-only (breaks on mobile), 1=Major issues (some breakpoints, many failures), 2=Partial (works on mobile, rough edges), 3=Good (responsive, minor touch target or overflow issues), 4=Excellent (fluid, all viewports, proper touch targets)

5. Anti-Patterns (CRITICAL)

Look for AI slop tells (generic indigo/violet palette, gradient text, dark glows, glassmorphism, hero-metric layouts, identical 3-card grids, generic geometric fonts) and general design anti-patterns (gray text on colored backgrounds, nested cards, bounce/elastic easing, redundant copy that restates a visible label).

Score 0-4: 0=AI slop gallery (5+ tells), 1=Heavy AI aesthetic (3-4 tells), 2=Some tells (1-2 noticeable), 3=Mostly clean (subtle issues only), 4=No AI tells (distinctive, intentional design)

Generate Report

Audit Health Score

#	Dimension	Score	Key Finding
1	Accessibility	?	[most critical a11y issue or "--"]
2	Performance	?
3	Responsive Design	?
4	Theming	?
5	Anti-Patterns	?
Total		??/20	[Rating band]

Rating bands: 18-20 Excellent (minor polish), 14-17 Good (address weak dimensions), 10-13 Acceptable (significant work needed), 6-9 Poor (major overhaul), 0-5 Critical (fundamental issues)

Anti-Patterns Verdict

Start here. Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells. Be brutally honest.

Executive Summary

Audit Health Score: ??/20 ([rating band])
Total issues found (count by severity: P0/P1/P2/P3)
Top 3-5 critical issues
Recommended next steps

Detailed Findings by Severity

Tag every issue with P0-P3 severity:

P0 Blocking: Prevents task completion — fix immediately
P1 Major: Significant difficulty or WCAG AA violation — fix before release
P2 Minor: Annoyance, workaround exists — fix in next pass
P3 Polish: Nice-to-fix, no real user impact — fix if time permits

For each issue, document:

[P?] Issue name
Location: Component, file, line
Category: Accessibility / Performance / Theming / Responsive / Anti-Pattern
Impact: How it affects users
WCAG/Standard: Which standard it violates (if applicable)
Recommendation: How to fix it
Suggested command: Which command or skill to use to fix it

Patterns & Systemic Issues

Identify recurring problems that indicate systemic gaps rather than one-off mistakes:

"Hard-coded colors appear in 15+ components, should use design tokens"
"Touch targets consistently too small (<44px) throughout mobile experience"

Positive Findings

List 1-3 implementation practices worth preserving, with file/component evidence. Omit this section when there is no concrete positive finding.

Recommended Actions

List recommended commands in priority order (P0 first, then P1, then P2):

[P?] /command-name — Brief description (specific context from audit findings)
[P?] /command-name — Brief description (specific context)

Rules: Map findings to the most appropriate available skill or command. End with a polish/cleanup step as the final recommendation if any fixes were recommended.

After presenting the summary, tell the user:

You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.

Re-run /audit after fixes to see your score improve.

Limit P3 findings to the top five unless the user asks for a complete backlog.

NEVER:

Report issues without explaining impact (why does this matter?)
Provide recommendations without file/component evidence and a fix path
Skip positive findings (celebrate what works)
Forget to prioritize (everything can't be P0)
Report false positives without verification

{
  "ocm": "1",
  "id": "shipshitdev-skills-audit",
  "kind": "skill",
  "name": "audit",
  "description": "Sweeps implemented frontend code across five dimensions at once — accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns — scoring each 0-4 and emitting a single P0-P3 report with a prioritized plan. Reports only; it changes no code. Reach for it as the broad first pass when no one dimension has been named. For a deep WCAG conformance pass, use `accessibility`; for design-token drift, use `design-consistency-auditor`.",
  "publisher": "shipshitdev",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "capabilities": {
    "domains": [
      "coding",
      "math"
    ],
    "tags": [
      "skill-md",
      "audit",
      "quality",
      "accessibility",
      "skills-sh"
    ],
    "languages": [
      "en"
    ]
  },
  "quality_prior": 0.6,
  "examples": [
    "Sweeps implemented frontend code across five dimensions at once — accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns — scoring each 0-4 and emitting a single P0-P3 report with a prioritized plan. Reports only; it changes no code. Reach for it as the broad first pass when no one dimension has been named. For a deep WCAG conformance pass, use `accessibility`; for design-token drift, use `design-consistency-auditor`."
  ],
  "primary": false,
  "metadata": {
    "source": {
      "provider": "skills.sh",
      "repository": "https://github.com/shipshitdev/skills",
      "path": "skills/audit/SKILL.md",
      "ref": "HEAD",
      "url": "https://github.com/shipshitdev/skills/blob/HEAD/skills/audit/SKILL.md",
      "key": "shipshitdev/skills/skills/audit/SKILL.md"
    }
  },
  "instructions": "Run systematic **technical** quality checks and generate the report below. Do\nnot fix issues in this skill.\n\nBefore scanning, read the existing design system (CSS / tokens / theme and a representative component) so \"correct\" is measured against the project's own conventions, not generic defaults. If the repo carries design context (`PRODUCT.md`, `DESIGN.md`, `.impeccable.md`, or a `## Design Context` block in `.github/copilot-instructions.md`), read it too.\n\nThis is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.\n\n## Diagnostic Scan\n\nRun",
  "cost": {
    "context_tokens": 1779
  }
}

Fetch it by URL: GET /api/v1/registry/shipshitdev-skills-audit/manifest?version=1.0.0

Reviews

Star ratings from people who tried it. One review per account; edit yours any time.

No reviews yet. Install it, try it, and be the first to rate it.

audit

About

Diagnostic Scan

1. Accessibility (A11y)

2. Performance

3. Theming

4. Responsive Design

5. Anti-Patterns (CRITICAL)

Generate Report

Audit Health Score

Anti-Patterns Verdict

Executive Summary

Detailed Findings by Severity

Patterns & Systemic Issues

Positive Findings

Recommended Actions

Related

Use it

Manifest

Reviews