Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add kmshihab7878/claude-code-setup --skill impeccable-audit --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Impeccable Audit?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/kmshihab7878-impeccable-audit)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: impeccable-audit
description: "Run technical quality checks across accessibility, performance, theming, responsive design, and anti-patterns. Generates a scored report with P0-P3 severity ratings and actionable plan. Use when the user wants an accessibility check, performance audit, or technical quality review."
user-invocable: true
argument-hint: "[area (feature, page, component...)]"
license: Apache 2.0. Based on pbakaus/impeccable audit skill.
---
## MANDATORY PREPARATION
Invoke `/impeccable-design` — it contains design principles, anti-patterns, and the Context Gathering Protocol. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no design context exists yet, ask the user directly for target audience, use cases, and brand personality first.
---
Run systematic **technical** quality checks and generate a comprehensive report. Don't fix issues — document them for other commands to address.
This is a code-level audit, not a design critique. Check what's measurable and verifiable in the implementation.
## Diagnostic Scan
Run comprehensive checks across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-4 using the criteria below.
### 1. Accessibility (A11y)
**Check for**: Contrast issues (text <4.5:1), missing ARIA labels/roles, keyboard navigation gaps, illogical tab order, semantic HTML issues, missing alt text, forms without labels.
**Score 0-4**: 0=Inaccessible (fails WCAG A), 1=Major gaps, 2=Partial (some a11y, significant gaps), 3=Good (WCAG AA mostly met), 4=Excellent (WCAG AA fully met)
### 2. Performance
**Check for**: Layout thrashing (reading/writing layout props in loops), expensive animations (animating width/height/top/left instead of transform/opacity), missing lazy loading, unnecessary imports, unoptimized re-renders.
**Score 0-4**: 0=Severe issues, 1=Major problems, 2=Partial, 3=Good (mostly optimized), 4=Excellent
### 3. Theming
**Check for**: Hard-coded colors (not using design tokens), broken dark mode, inconsistent token usage, values that don't update on theme change.
**Score 0-4**: 0=No theming, 1=Minimal tokens, 2=Partial, 3=Good (tokens used, minor hard-coded), 4=Excellent (full token system)
### 4. Responsive Design
**Check for**: Fixed widths, touch targets <44×44px, horizontal scroll, text scaling issues, missing breakpoints.
**Score 0-4**: 0=Desktop-only, 1=Major issues, 2=Partial, 3=Good (responsive, minor issues), 4=Excellent
### 5. Anti-Patterns (CRITICAL)
Check against ALL **NEVER** guidelines in impeccable-design. Look for AI slop tells: AI color palette, gradient text, glassmorphism, hero metrics, card grids, generic fonts, rounded rectangles with generic shadows, bounce easing.
**Score 0-4**: 0=AI slop gallery (5+ tells), 1=Heavy AI aesthetic (3-4 tells), 2=Some tells (1-2), 3=Mostly clean (subtle only), 4=No AI tells
## Generate Report
### Audit Health Score
| # | Dimension | Score | Key Finding |
|---|-----------|-------|-------------|
| 1 | Accessibility | ? | [most critical issue or "--"] |
| 2 | Performance | ? | |
| 3 | Responsive Design | ? | |
| 4 | Theming | ? | |
| 5 | Anti-Patterns | ? | |
| **Total** | | **??/20** | **[Rating]** |
**Rating bands**: 18-20 Excellent, 14-17 Good, 10-13 Acceptable, 6-9 Poor, 0-5 Critical
### Anti-Patterns Verdict
**Start here.** Pass/fail: Does this look AI-generated? List specific tells. Be brutally honest.
### Executive Summary
- Audit Health Score: **??/20**
- Issue 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**:
- **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:
- **[P?] Issue name**
- **Location**: Component, file, line
- **Category**: Accessibility / Performance / Theming / Responsive / Anti-Pattern
- **Impact**: How it affects users
- **Recommendation**: How to fix it
- **Suggested command**: `/impeccable-design` or `/impeccable-polish`
### Systemic Issues
Identify recurring problems: "Hard-coded colors appear in 15+ components — should use design tokens"
### Positive Findings
Note what's working well — good practices to maintain and replicate.
## Recommended Actions
List recommended commands in priority order (P0 first):
1. **[P?] `/impeccable-polish`** — [specific context from audit findings]
2. **[P?] `/impeccable-design`** — [context]
After presenting the summary:
> You can ask me to run these one at a time, all at once, or in any order you prefer.
> Re-run `/impeccable-audit` after fixes to see your score improve.
**NEVER**: Report without impact explanation. Provide generic recommendations. Skip positive findings. Forget to prioritize.
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!