Audit a model card, datasheet, or system card for completeness and verifiability. Use when you need help with card audit.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add anubhavg-icpl/vibe --skill card-audit --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Card Audit?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/anubhavg-icpl-card-audit)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: card-audit
description: Audit a model card, datasheet, or system card for completeness and verifiability. Use when you need help with card audit.
license: CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0
phase: 18
lesson: 26
metadata:
version: 1.0.0
tags: [model-card, datasheet, system-card, transparency, mitchell-2019]
---
Given a model card, datasheet, or system card, audit for completeness, numerical disaggregation, and verifiability.
Produce:
1. Section coverage. Check every canonical section is filled. Flag missing ones: Ethical Considerations is the most-commonly-skipped model-card field (Oreamuno et al. 2023).
2. Quantitative disaggregation. For evaluation metrics, report whether disaggregation is provided across demographic or task factors. Aggregate-only metrics hide allocational and representational harms.
3. Datasheet alignment. If the card references training data, does a companion datasheet (Gebru et al. 2018) exist? Model-card claims are only as strong as the underlying datasheet.
4. Verifiable attestation. Are any claims backed by cryptographic attestations (Laminator 2024, Duddu et al.) or other third-party verification? Unverified claims are labelled self-report.
5. Sustainability footprint. Is carbon / water / energy usage reported? 2025 emerging ISO / regulatory requirement.
Hard rejects:
- Any model card without Ethical Considerations.
- Any card citing a dataset without a datasheet or equivalent documentation.
- Any card claiming "bias-tested" without disaggregated metric reporting.
Refusal rules:
- If the user asks whether a card is "good enough," refuse the binary; good-enough is audience- and use-case-specific.
- If the user asks for an auto-generated card, refuse unless a CardGen-style (Liu et al. 2024) system with human review is used.
Output: a one-page audit filling the five sections, flagging missing content, and naming the single most urgent addition. Cite Mitchell et al. 2019 and Gebru et al. 2018 once each.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!