Use when the user asks for a code review, "review this change", "review my PR", "review the diff", or wants quality/spec/security/perf feedback on recent changes. Triggers a multi-level review with a thinking-tier reviewer agent. Standalone — does not auto-chain.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add ccplugins/awesome-claude-code-plugins --skill audit --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Audit?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/ccplugins-audit)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: audit
description: Use when the user asks for a code review, "review this change", "review my PR", "review the diff", or wants quality/spec/security/perf feedback on recent changes. Triggers a multi-level review with a thinking-tier reviewer agent. Standalone — does not auto-chain.
---
# Audit
Standalone multi-level code review. Dispatcher — Opus 4.7 (thinking-tier). Workers — Sonnet 4.6.
## Inputs
- **Target** — file path, line range, commit SHA, branch, or PR number provided by the user
- **Default (no target)** — `git diff HEAD` + `git diff --staged`
- **Level flag** — `--level 1` through `--level 5` (default — L2)
## Review Levels
Adapted from [review-levels.md](../hyperflow/review-levels.md):
| L | Name | Checks |
|---|------|--------|
| 1 | Quick | Syntax, obvious bugs, formatting |
| 2 | Standard | L1 + spec compliance, naming, edge cases |
| 3 | Thorough | L2 + cross-file consistency, integration risks, security |
| 4 | Deep | L3 + architecture, scalability, accessibility |
| 5 | Exhaustive | L4 + adversarial probing, perf profiling, alternatives |
Security scan (hardcoded secrets, injection, path traversal, XSS, missing validation) is mandatory at L3+. See [security.md](../hyperflow/security.md).
## Flow
1. Resolve scope — use provided target or run `git diff HEAD` + `git diff --staged`.
2. Dispatch `Searcher — gathering context for review` (Sonnet 4.6) to map referenced files and load relevant project context.
3. Dispatch `**Reviewer** — reviewing <scope> at level L<n>` — Opus 4.7 (thinking-tier, non-negotiable).
4. Reviewer uses [reviewer-prompt.md](../hyperflow/reviewer-prompt.md) template with the diff, level definition, and any applicable spec.
5. Aggregate findings into structured output (see below).
6. Append durable patterns/gotchas to `.hyperflow/memory/learnings.md` per [memory-system.md](../hyperflow/memory-system.md).
If any security issue found → emit `SECURITY_VIOLATION:` halt marker immediately.
## Output Format
```
── Review Result ──────────────────────
Scope: <files / range / commit>
Level: L<n>
Verdict: PASS | NEEDS_FIX | SECURITY_VIOLATION
[Critical]
- file:line — issue + required fix
[Important]
- file:line — issue + recommended fix
[Suggestions]
- file:line — optional improvement
[Praise]
- file:line — what's done well
───────────────────────────────────────
Agents: 1 searcher (sonnet) · 1 reviewer (opus)
```
## Hand-off (no auto-chain)
- **PASS** — suggest `/hyperflow:deploy` if the user is ready to release. Do not auto-ship.
- **NEEDS_FIX** — print the finding list and suggest `/hyperflow:trace` (for root-cause bugs) or manual edits. Do not auto-fix.
- **SECURITY_VIOLATION** — halt; do not transition. User decides remediation path.
## Doctrine
Full rules in [DOCTRINE.md](../hyperflow/DOCTRINE.md). Output style in [output-style.md](../hyperflow/output-style.md).

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!