Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索操作浏览器github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计异常

kata-audit-milestone卡塔审计里程碑

Agent Skill

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

总安装

436

周安装

18

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

143
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:kata-audit-milestone(卡塔审计里程碑)
来源仓库:https://github.com/gannonh/kata-skills
仓库路径:skills/kata-audit-milestone
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/gannonh/kata-skills --skill kata-audit-milestone
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/gannonh/kata-skills --skill kata-audit-milestone

简介

kata-audit-milestone 用于辅助安全审计、权限检查和凭据风险排查。

  • 适合梳理敏感配置、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。
  • 不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论,需人工复核关键操作。
  • 涉及密钥或生产系统时应先确认最小权限和操作边界。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

This command IS the orchestrator. Reads existing VERIFICATION.md files (phases already verified during phase-execute), aggregates tech debt and deferred gaps, then spawns integration checker for cross-phase wiring.

<execution_context>

</execution_context>

Original Intent: @.planning/PROJECT.md @.planning/REQUIREMENTS.md

Planned Work: @.planning/ROADMAP.md @.planning/config.json (if exists)

Completed Work: Glob:.planning/phases/{active,pending,completed}/*/*-SUMMARY.md Glob:.planning/phases/{active,pending,completed}/*/*-VERIFICATION.md (Also check flat:.planning/phases/[0-9]*/*-SUMMARY.md for backward compatibility)

0. Resolve Model Profile

Read model profile for agent spawning:

MODEL_PROFILE=$(node scripts/kata-lib.cjs read-config "model_profile" "balanced")

Default to "balanced" if not set.

Model lookup table:

Agentqualitybalancedbudget
kata-integration-checkersonnetsonnethaiku

Store resolved model for use in Task call below.

0.5. Pre-flight: Check roadmap format (auto-migration)

If ROADMAP.md exists, check format and auto-migrate if old:

if [ -f .planning/ROADMAP.md ]; then
  node scripts/kata-lib.cjs check-roadmap 2>/dev/null
  FORMAT_EXIT=$?

  if [ $FORMAT_EXIT -eq 1 ]; then
    echo "Old roadmap format detected. Running auto-migration..."
  fi
fi

If exit code 1 (old format):

Invoke kata-doctor in auto mode:

Skill("kata-doctor", "--auto")

Continue after migration completes.

If exit code 0 or 2: Continue silently.

1. Determine Milestone Scope

# Scan all phase directories across states
ALL_PHASE_DIRS=""
for state in active pending completed; do
  [ -d ".planning/phases/${state}" ] && ALL_PHASE_DIRS="${ALL_PHASE_DIRS} $(find .planning/phases/${state} -maxdepth 1 -type d -not -name "${state}" 2>/dev/null)"
done
# Fallback: include flat directories (backward compatibility)
FLAT_DIRS=$(find .planning/phases -maxdepth 1 -type d -name "[0-9]*" 2>/dev/null)
[ -n "$FLAT_DIRS" ] && ALL_PHASE_DIRS="${ALL_PHASE_DIRS} ${FLAT_DIRS}"
echo "$ALL_PHASE_DIRS" | tr ' ' '\n' | sort -V
  • Parse version from arguments or detect current from ROADMAP.md
  • Identify all phase directories in scope (across active/pending/completed subdirectories)
  • Extract milestone definition of done from ROADMAP.md
  • Extract requirements mapped to this milestone from REQUIREMENTS.md

2. Read All Phase Verifications

For each phase directory, read the VERIFICATION.md:

# Read VERIFICATION.md from each phase directory found in step 1
for phase_dir in $ALL_PHASE_DIRS; do
  [ -d "$phase_dir" ] || continue
  cat "${phase_dir}"*-VERIFICATION.md 2>/dev/null
done

From each VERIFICATION.md, extract:

  • Status: passed | gaps_found
  • Critical gaps: (if any — these are blockers)
  • Non-critical gaps: tech debt, deferred items, warnings
  • Anti-patterns found: TODOs, stubs, placeholders
  • Requirements coverage: which requirements satisfied/blocked

If a phase is missing VERIFICATION.md, flag it as "unverified phase" — this is a blocker.

3. Spawn Integration Checker

Read the integration checker instructions:

integration_checker_instructions_content = Read("skills/kata-audit-milestone/references/integration-checker-instructions.md")

With phase context collected:

Task(
  prompt="<agent-instructions>
{integration_checker_instructions_content}
</agent-instructions>

Check cross-phase integration and E2E flows.

Phases: {phase_dirs}
Phase exports: {from SUMMARYs}
API routes: {routes created}

Verify cross-phase wiring and E2E user flows.",
  subagent_type="general-purpose",
  model="{integration_checker_model}"
)

4. Collect Results

Combine:

  • Phase-level gaps and tech debt (from step 2)
  • Integration checker's report (wiring gaps, broken flows)

5. Check Requirements Coverage

For each requirement in REQUIREMENTS.md mapped to this milestone:

  • Find owning phase
  • Check phase verification status
  • Determine: satisfied | partial | unsatisfied

6. Aggregate into v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md

Create .planning/v{version}-v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md with:

---
milestone: { version }
audited: { timestamp }
status: passed | gaps_found | tech_debt
scores:
  requirements: N/M
  phases: N/M
  integration: N/M
  flows: N/M
gaps: # Critical blockers
  requirements: [...]
  integration: [...]
  flows: [...]
tech_debt: # Non-critical, deferred
  - phase: 01-auth
    items:
      - "TODO: add rate limiting"
      - "Warning: no password strength validation"
  - phase: 03-dashboard
    items:
      - "Deferred: mobile responsive layout"
---

Plus full markdown report with tables for requirements, phases, integration, tech debt.

Status values:

  • passed — all requirements met, no critical gaps, minimal tech debt
  • gaps_found — critical blockers exist
  • tech_debt — no blockers but accumulated deferred items need review

7. Present Results

Route by status (see <offer_next>).

8. Offer UAT Walkthrough

Use AskUserQuestion:

  • header: "UAT Walkthrough"
  • question: "Would you like a complete walk-through UAT session?"
  • options:

- "Full walkthrough" — walk through all user-observable deliverables - "Integration only" — focus on cross-phase flows - "Skip" — done with audit

If Skip: Proceed to <offer_next>.

If walkthrough chosen:

  1. Read all phase SUMMARY.md files in milestone scope
  2. Extract user-observable deliverables (features, behaviors, UI changes)
  3. Classify each deliverable as user-facing or internal:

- User-facing: Things end-users interact with through the product's normal interface. For a web app: pages, forms, buttons, API responses. For a CLI tool: commands, flags, output. For a library: public API, configuration options. The test is: would the end-user encounter this during normal use? - Internal: Everything else. Scripts, helper functions, reference docs, test files, build artifacts, refactors, and implementation modules are INTERNAL even if they can be invoked directly from a terminal. If the end-user never runs it, sees it, or interacts with it, it's internal.

  1. Design demo scenarios organized by user journey, not by phase or technical component:

- Map the order in which an end-user naturally encounters these features (e.g., project setup → configuration → daily use → completion) - Each batch follows one segment of that journey, not one phase or one script - "Full walkthrough": walk through the complete user journey, then summarize internal changes - "Integration only": demo cross-phase flows only

  1. Create .planning/v{version}-UAT.md adapted from UAT template format:

- milestone: {version} instead of phase: - source: lists all phase SUMMARY.md files

  1. Set up the environment, then hand off to the user <uat_rules> CRITICAL: The user performs UAT, not you. UAT verifies the milestone's deliverables work from the end-user's perspective. The user interacts with what was built (their app, their CLI, their API). You prepare the environment and give instructions. You MUST NOT run the demo yourself and report results back. What you do: What the user does: Anti-pattern (WRONG): Claude runs curl against the API itself Claude opens the page and reads the DOM Claude says: "The login endpoint returns 200, it works!" This is automated verification, not user acceptance testing. Correct pattern: Claude says: "I started the dev server on port 3000. Try this: 1. Open http://localhost:3000/login in your browser 2. Enter test@example.com / password123 3. You should be redirected to the dashboard with your name displayed What do you see?" The user experiences the feature. Claude waits for their report. </uat_rules> Scenario design principles: Internal changes get summarized verification. Run tests, check build output, and inspect artifacts yourself. Present a summary to the user ("all 47 tests pass, build succeeds"). The user confirms or flags concerns. Do not ask the user to grep files, read source, or run diagnostic commands. Before each batch, brief the user on context from the end-user's perspective. Describe what the user will experience, not what was built internally. Wrong: "v1.10.0 adds a worktree.enabled config option read by three skills." Right: "When you create a new project, you'll now see a question about Git Worktrees." Then give setup instructions if needed (cd to a directory, open a session, etc.). Then present the batch using AskUserQuestion with multiSelect: Use AskUserQuestion: - header: "UAT Batch {N}" - question: "Try each scenario and select the ones that pass. Unselected = needs investigation." - multiSelect: true - options: - "S{X}: {short name}" — {instruction for user to follow} - "S{Y}: {short name}" — {instruction for user to follow} - "S{Z}: {short name}" — {instruction for user to follow} - "None pass" — all scenarios in this batch failed For any scenario NOT selected (failed): Continue batches until all scenarios are presented.

- Start dev servers, seed databases, install dependencies — whatever setup the user needs - Run internal verification yourself (tests, build checks) and summarize results - Write clear step-by-step instructions telling the user what to try - Wait for the user to report back what happened - Opens the app, runs commands, submits forms, navigates pages - Observes behavior and reports whether it matches expectations - Flags anything unexpected - Each scenario is an instruction TO the user, not a command for Claude to run - Scenarios exercise the product's normal interface — the same way an end-user would encounter the feature. For a web app: open a URL, click a button, submit a form. For a CLI: run the command the user would run. NEVER have the user invoke internal scripts, grep source files, or inspect implementation details - Tell the user what to look for: "You should see X" or "The output should include Y" - Group related scenarios into batches of 2-4 - If a milestone is mostly internal work (infrastructure, refactors, scripts), most scenarios belong in the internal summary — don't force the user to manually test internals - Ask follow-up: "What's the issue with S{X}?" - Record user's description as a gap with severity inferred from response

  1. Update UAT.md after each batch with pass/fail status and user-provided evidence
  2. On completion: commit UAT.md

If all scenarios pass: Proceed to <offer_next> (audit status unchanged).

If issues found — merge gaps into audit file:

  1. Append UAT gap entries to MILESTONE-AUDIT.md under gaps.flows (for E2E breaks) or gaps.requirements (for unmet requirements), using the same YAML structure the audit already uses
  2. Update MILESTONE-AUDIT.md frontmatter: status: gaps_found (if it was passed or tech_debt)
  3. Update UAT.md summary counts

Then use AskUserQuestion:

  • header: "Issues Found"
  • question: "{N} issues found during walkthrough. How to proceed?"
  • options:

- "Plan fix phases" — route to /kata-plan-milestone-gaps (reads the updated audit file) - "Accept as known issues" — document in UAT.md, revert MILESTONE-AUDIT.md status to original - "Stop" — halt for manual intervention

<offer_next> Output this markdown directly (not as a code block). Route based on status:


If passed:

✓ Milestone {version} — Audit Passed

Score: {N}/{M} requirements satisfied Report:.planning/v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md {If walkthrough was run:} UAT:.planning/v{version}-UAT.md — all scenarios passed

All requirements covered. Cross-phase integration verified. E2E flows complete.

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

▶ Next Up

Complete milestone — archive and tag

/kata-complete-milestone {version}

/clear first → fresh context window

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────


If gaps_found:

⚠ Milestone {version} — Gaps Found

Score: {N}/{M} requirements satisfied Report:.planning/v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md {If walkthrough was run:} UAT:.planning/v{version}-UAT.md

Unsatisfied Requirements

{For each unsatisfied requirement:}

  • {REQ-ID}: {description} (Phase {X})

- {reason}

Cross-Phase Issues

{For each integration gap:}

  • {from} → {to}: {issue}

Broken Flows

{For each flow gap:}

  • {flow name}: breaks at {step}

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

▶ Next Up

Plan gap closure — create phases to complete milestone

/kata-plan-milestone-gaps

/clear first → fresh context window

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Also available:

  • cat.planning/v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md — see full report
  • /kata-complete-milestone {version} — proceed anyway (accept tech debt)

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────


If tech_debt (no blockers but accumulated debt):

⚡ Milestone {version} — Tech Debt Review

Score: {N}/{M} requirements satisfied Report:.planning/v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md {If walkthrough was run:} UAT:.planning/v{version}-UAT.md

All requirements met. No critical blockers. Accumulated tech debt needs review.

Tech Debt by Phase

{For each phase with debt:} Phase {X}: {name}

  • {item 1}
  • {item 2}

Total: {N} items across {M} phases

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

▶ Options

A. Complete milestone — accept debt, track in backlog

/kata-complete-milestone {version}

B. Plan cleanup phase — address debt before completing

/kata-plan-milestone-gaps

/clear first → fresh context window

─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── </offer_next>

<success_criteria>

  • Milestone scope identified
  • All phase VERIFICATION.md files read
  • Tech debt and deferred gaps aggregated
  • Integration checker spawned for cross-phase wiring
  • v{version}-MILESTONE-AUDIT.md created
  • Results presented with actionable next steps
  • UAT walkthrough offered
  • v{version}-UAT.md created (if walkthrough chosen)
  • MILESTONE-AUDIT.md updated with UAT gaps (if issues found) </success_criteria>

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

37.46%
按下载量换算54

Claude

28.48%
按下载量换算41

Cursor

18.96%
按下载量换算27

Gemini CLI

8.91%
按下载量换算13

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

未通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

操作浏览器

该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills