Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Audit 11?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/david-li0406-audit-11)
---
name: audit
description: Review AI-drafted issues for human approval
argument-hint: [issue-number] (optional)
allowed-tools: Bash, AskUserQuestion, Read, Grep, Glob
disable-model-invocation: true
agent: audit-agent
---
# Issue Audit Command
This command helps review issues labeled `ai-drafted` and either approve them for implementation or request changes.
## Dynamic Context
**Current AI-drafted issues:**
!`gh issue list --label ai-drafted --json number,title --limit 10 2>/dev/null || echo "Could not fetch issues"`
## Context
Issues with `ai-drafted` label were groomed by the `/groom` command. They have:
- Expanded Description
- Acceptance Criteria
- Out of Scope
But the AI's decisions haven't been verified by a human yet.
## Arguments
**Issue number:** $ARGUMENTS
## Instructions
### Step 1: Fetch Issues
If an issue number was provided above (not empty):
- Skip to Step 2 with that issue number
If no issue number was provided:
1. Fetch issues with `ai-drafted` label:
```bash
gh issue list --label ai-drafted --json number,title --limit 20
```
2. If no issues found, inform the user and exit.
3. Use AskUserQuestion to let the user select which issues to audit (set multiSelect: true)
### Step 2: Review Each Issue
For each selected issue:
1. **Fetch full issue details:**
```bash
gh issue view <number> --json number,title,body,labels
```
2. **Present the issue content** clearly formatted:
- Title
- Description
- Acceptance Criteria
- Out of Scope
- Any other sections
3. **Optionally research context** if user asks:
- Use Grep/Glob/Read to verify technical details
- Check if acceptance criteria are realistic
- Verify scope boundaries make sense
4. **Use the review checklist** from `.claude/skills/audit/templates/review-criteria.md`:
- Description quality
- Acceptance criteria testability
- Out of scope clarity
- Technical accuracy
- Completeness
5. **Use AskUserQuestion for a verdict** with these options (in this order):
- **Approve**: Remove `ai-drafted` label, issue is ready for implementation
- **Approve with edits**: Make minor changes, then remove `ai-drafted`
- **Send back for re-grooming**: Move back to `needs-details`, remove `ready` and `ai-drafted`
- **Skip**: Review later, no changes
### Step 3: Apply Updates
Based on user's verdict:
**Approve:**
```bash
gh issue edit <number> --remove-label ai-drafted
```
**Approve with edits:**
- Ask user what changes to make
- Update issue body: `gh issue edit <number> --body "<updated body>"`
- Remove label: `gh issue edit <number> --remove-label ai-drafted`
**Send back for re-grooming:**
```bash
gh issue edit <number> --remove-label ai-drafted --remove-label ready --add-label needs-details
```
Optionally add a comment explaining what needs to change:
```bash
gh issue comment <number> --body "Sent back for re-grooming: <reason>"
```
**Skip:**
- No changes, move to next issue
### Step 4: Summary
After all issues are processed, provide a summary:
- Number of issues approved
- Number sent back for re-grooming
- Number skipped
- Links to updated issues
## Notes
- This is a lighter-weight review than `/groom` - no subagents needed
- Focus on verifying the AI's decisions were sound
- Check that acceptance criteria are testable and complete
- Verify out-of-scope items make sense
- If something looks wrong, ask clarifying questions before deciding