meta-audit

📁 laurigates/claude-plugins 📅 4 days ago
1
总安装量
1
周安装量
#49178
全站排名
安装命令
npx skills add https://github.com/laurigates/claude-plugins --skill meta-audit

Agent 安装分布

mcpjam 1
claude-code 1
replit 1
junie 1
windsurf 1
zencoder 1

Skill 文档

Context

  • Agent definitions: !find .claude/agents -name "*.md" -not -name "settings*"
  • Settings file: !find .claude/agents -maxdepth 1 -name "settings.local.json" -type f

Your task

1. Discovery Phase

  • Use Glob to find all agent definition files in .claude/agents/
  • Read each agent file to extract frontmatter and configuration
  • Identify the settings.local.json for permission overrides

2. Frontmatter Validation

For each agent, verify required fields are present:

  • ✅ name: Agent identifier (must match filename)
  • ✅ model: Claude model to use (e.g., “claude-sonnet-4-5”)
  • ✅ color: Hex color code for UI (e.g., “#E53E3E”)
  • ✅ description: Clear usage guidance with “Use proactively when…”
  • ✅ tools: Tool list or “All” for full access

Flag issues:

  • Missing required fields
  • Mismatched name vs filename
  • Invalid model names
  • Malformed color codes

3. Tool Assignment Analysis

Evaluate tool assignments for security and appropriateness:

Read-only agents (should NOT have write access):

  • research-documentation
  • code-analysis (read only)
  • code-review (read + LSP only)
  • security-audit (read + LSP + Bash for scanning)

Write-enabled agents (appropriate write access):

  • code-refactoring (Edit, MultiEdit)
  • documentation (Write, MultiEdit)
  • cicd-pipelines (Write, Edit, GitHub)

Special privileges (validate necessity):

  • Bash access (security-audit, system-debugging, cicd-pipelines, test-architecture)
  • GitHub access (cicd-pipelines, commit-review)
  • Zen MCP access (system-debugging only)
  • All tools access (should be rare, validate justification)

LSP tool assignments (language-specific):

  • Verify LSP tools match agent’s language focus
  • security-audit should have broad LSP coverage (6+ servers)
  • code-review should have multi-language LSP support
  • code-analysis should have appropriate LSP access

4. Security Assessment

Check for potential security issues:

Overprivileged agents:

  • Agents with “All” tools without clear justification
  • Read-only agents with write/edit capabilities
  • Unnecessary Bash or GitHub access
  • Research agents with modification permissions

Missing restrictions:

  • settings.local.json should have deny rules for destructive operations
  • Allow list should be minimal and specific
  • No wildcard tool access unless justified

Privilege escalation risks:

  • Agents that can modify other agent configs
  • Agents with both read and execute permissions
  • Cross-agent permission leakage

5. Consistency Checks

Validate configuration consistency:

Naming conventions:

  • Agent names use kebab-case
  • Filenames match agent names
  • Descriptions follow consistent format

Model assignments:

  • All agents use appropriate Claude models
  • No deprecated model references
  • Consistent model selection strategy

Tool groupings:

  • Similar agents have similar tool sets
  • No duplicate or redundant tool assignments
  • Clear separation of concerns

6. Report Generation

Create comprehensive audit report with:

Executive Summary:

  • Total agents audited
  • Critical issues found
  • Security concerns
  • Overall health rating

Detailed Findings:

  • ❌ Critical: Missing required fields, security violations
  • ⚠️ Warnings: Overprivileged agents, inconsistencies
  • ℹ️ Info: Best practice suggestions, optimization opportunities

Agent-by-Agent Analysis: For each agent, report:

  • Configuration completeness (✅/❌ for each required field)
  • Tool assignment appropriateness (✅/⚠️/❌)
  • Security assessment (safe/review/risk)
  • Recommendations for improvement

Action Items:

  • Immediate fixes required (with file paths and line numbers)
  • Optional improvements
  • Configuration validation passed/failed

7. Output Format

Structure the report as:

# Claude Agent Configuration Audit

## Executive Summary
- **Total Agents**: X
- **Configuration Issues**: Y
- **Security Concerns**: Z
- **Health Rating**: [EXCELLENT|GOOD|NEEDS_WORK|CRITICAL]

## Critical Issues
[List any critical problems requiring immediate fix]

## Agent Analysis Table
| Agent | Model | Tools | Color | Status | Notes |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|--------|-------|
| agent-name | ✅/❌ | ✅/⚠️/❌ | ✅/❌ | PASS/FAIL | Issues |

## Security Assessment
[Tool privilege analysis and security concerns]

## Recommendations
[Prioritized action items with file paths]

## Detailed Findings
[Per-agent breakdown with specific issues]

8. Best Practices Reference

Tool access principles:

  • Least privilege principle for tool access
  • Clear separation between read-only and write-enabled agents
  • Appropriate LSP tool coverage for language-specific work
  • Minimal Bash access (only when required)
  • Restricted GitHub access (only for git-ops and CI/CD)

Configuration standards:

  • All required frontmatter fields present
  • Consistent model selections across agents
  • Appropriate tool permissions for agent role
  • Clear descriptions with proactive usage guidance

9. Optional: Verbose Mode

If --verbose flag is provided:

  • Show full frontmatter for each agent
  • Display complete tool lists
  • Include settings.local.json content
  • Provide detailed fix commands for each issue

Notes

  • This is a read-only audit – modifications require explicit user request
  • Focus on configuration correctness and security implications
  • Provide actionable recommendations with specific file locations
  • Use TodoWrite to track audit progress if checking multiple agents