Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

proactive-audit(主动审计)

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。

proactive-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 49,058。

总安装 665周安装 28GitHub Stars 25下载 233核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

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:proactive-audit(主动审计)
来源仓库:https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio
仓库路径:skills/proactive-audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill proactive-audit
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/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill proactive-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

proactive-audit 用于辅助安全审计、权限检查和常见漏洞排查。适合梳理敏感配置、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。可在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中调用以支持风险识别。不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论,需确认最小权限和操作边界。

涉及密钥或生产系统时,应先评估脱敏方式和执行环境安全性。

来源仓库内路径:skills/proactive-audit

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill proactive-audi…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要接触敏感数据,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

proactive-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill proactive-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

proactive-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

proactive-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

proactive-audit 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

proactive-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 665 次,近一周安装 28 次,下载 233 次,GitHub 25 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

proactive-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
proactive-audit

主动审计 · 本页

66525接触敏感数据未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Proactive Audit

Overview

Automated health checks for framework artifacts that were modified during the current pipeline. This skill fills the gap between reactive verification (tests, lint) and proactive framework-level validation (wiring, syntax, security patterns).

Core principle: Framework artifact changes require the same rigor as code changes. If a skill was created, verify it is wired. If a hook was modified, verify it compiles. If an agent was changed, verify its tool/skill lists are consistent.

When to Invoke

Invoke this skill as the final pipeline step whenever ANY of the following paths were created, modified, or deleted during the session:

  • .claude/hooks/**/*.cjs
  • .claude/skills/**/SKILL.md
  • .claude/agents/**/*.md
  • .claude/workflows/**/*.md
  • .claude/schemas/**/*.json
  • .claude/templates/**/*
  • .claude/CLAUDE.md
  • .claude/lib/routing/routing-table.cjs

Invocation:

Skill({ skill: 'proactive-audit' });

Mandatory Skills

SkillPurposeWhen
task-management-protocolTrack audit progressAlways
ripgrepFast targeted artifact searchDuring checks
code-semantic-searchPattern discovery across artifactsWhen investigating
context-compressorCompress large audit resultsWhen output is large
verification-before-completionGate completion on zero CRITICALBefore marking done
memory-searchCheck prior audit patternsAt start

Step 1: Detect Changed Artifacts

Use git diff to identify which framework artifacts changed in this session:

# Primary: git diff against recent commits
git diff --name-only HEAD~5 -- .claude/hooks/ .claude/skills/ .claude/agents/ .claude/workflows/ .claude/schemas/ .claude/templates/ .claude/CLAUDE.md .claude/lib/routing/

# Secondary: check unstaged changes
git diff --name-only -- .claude/hooks/ .claude/skills/ .claude/agents/ .claude/workflows/ .claude/schemas/ .claude/templates/

# Tertiary: check untracked files
git ls-files --others --exclude-standard .claude/hooks/ .claude/skills/ .claude/agents/ .claude/workflows/ .claude/schemas/ .claude/templates/

Combine all three lists into a deduplicated set of changed artifact paths.

Step 2: Apply Check Matrix

For each changed artifact, apply the relevant checks from this matrix:

Hook Files (.claude/hooks/**/*.cjs)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
H-01Syntax validitynode --check <file>CRITICAL
H-02SE-02: raw JSON.parse without safeParseJSONgrep -n "JSON.parse(" <file> then verify safeParseJSON importHIGH
H-03SE-01: shell injection via shell: truegrep -n "shell:\\s*true" <file>HIGH
H-04Hook registered in settings.jsongrep "<hook-filename>".claude/settings.jsonMEDIUM
H-05Exit code correctnessVerify try/catch wrapping, exit 0 on non-critical errorsMEDIUM

H-02 detail: If JSON.parse( is found, check if the file also imports safeParseJSON from .claude/lib/utils/safe-json.cjs. If not, flag as HIGH finding. Exclude test files (*.test.cjs).

Skill Files (.claude/skills/**/SKILL.md)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
S-01Skill appears in skill-catalog.mdgrep "<skill-name>".claude/docs/skill-catalog.mdHIGH
S-02At least one agent has skill in frontmattergrep -r "<skill-name>".claude/agents/ --include="*.md"MEDIUM
S-03Skill appears in CLAUDE.md Section 8.5grep "<skill-name>".claude/CLAUDE.mdMEDIUM
S-04SKILL.md has valid frontmatterVerify name:, description:, version: fields existMEDIUM
S-05Validate skills (if available)pnpm validate:skills 2>&1LOW

Agent Files (.claude/agents/**/*.md)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
A-01Agent appears in agent-registry.jsongrep "<agent-name>".claude/context/agent-registry.jsonHIGH
A-02Agent's skills: list references existing skillsFor each skill in frontmatter, verify .claude/skills/<skill>/SKILL.md existsMEDIUM
A-03Agent's tools: list contains only valid toolsVerify each tool name against known tool listMEDIUM
A-04Agent appears in CLAUDE.md routing tablegrep "<agent-name>".claude/CLAUDE.mdMEDIUM

Workflow Files (.claude/workflows/**/*.md)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
W-01Workflow referenced in WORKFLOW_AGENT_MAP.mdgrep "<workflow-name>".claude/docs/@WORKFLOW_AGENT_MAP.mdMEDIUM
W-02Referenced agents existFor each agent name in workflow, verify agent file existsMEDIUM

Schema Files (.claude/schemas/**/*.json)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
SC-01Valid JSON syntaxnode -e "JSON.parse(require('fs').readFileSync('<file>', 'utf8'))"CRITICAL
SC-02Schema appears in schema-catalog.mdgrep "<schema-name>".claude/context/artifacts/catalogs/schema-catalog.mdMEDIUM

Root Cleanliness Check

ls -1 | grep -cvE '^(\.|node_modules|src|tests|scripts|dist|build|docs|package\.json|package-lock\.json|pnpm-lock\.yaml|tsconfig|eslint|prettier|jest|vitest|README|LICENSE|CHANGELOG|CLAUDE\.md|\.env)'

FAIL if the count is greater than 0.

Known slop patterns (any of these in project root = FAIL):

  • *-debug*.txt, *-debug*.log, debug-*.json
  • dump-*.cjs, dump-*.js, dump-*.json
  • rename_*.cjs, revert_*.cjs, update_*.cjs
  • test-out.txt, lint-output.txt, eslint.json, errors.json
  • UUID-named files (e.g. a3f2c1b0-*.json)
  • new_session_analysis.md or any *.analysis.md not under .claude/context/
  • Any .cjs/.js/.mjs not referenced in package.json scripts or tracked project source
  • Any .md not named README.md, CLAUDE.md, LICENSE, or CHANGELOG.md

Action when FAIL:

  1. Delete the offending files (or move to .claude/context/tmp/ if content may be needed)
  2. Log deletion to session-gap-log.jsonl with type: "cleanup"
  3. Append a reflection-spawn-request.json entry with trigger: "ai-slop-found" so the root cause is investigated

Reference: .claude/rules/cleanup-always.md

Documentation Staleness Check

After any feature work, verify:

  1. CHANGELOG.md — does it have an entry dated within the last session?

- Check: git log --oneline -5 vs grep "## \[" CHANGELOG.md | head -3 - FAIL if: feature commits exist but no matching CHANGELOG entry

  1. .env.example — does it document all env vars in the codebase?

- Check: grep -r "process.env\.".claude/skills/.claude/hooks/ | grep -oP "process\.env\.\K\w+" | sort -u - Compare against entries in .env.example - FAIL if: env var used in code but not documented in .env.example

  1. README.md — are agent/skill counts current?

- Check counts in README vs jq '.agents | length'.claude/context/agent-registry.json - WARN if counts diverge by more than 2

Routing Files (.claude/lib/routing/routing-table.cjs, .claude/CLAUDE.md)

Check IDCheckCommandSeverity
R-01routing-table.cjs syntaxnode --check.claude/lib/routing/routing-table.cjsCRITICAL
R-02Validate skills (full)pnpm validate:skills 2>&1MEDIUM

Step 3: Generate Report

Write a structured report to .claude/context/reports/ecosystem-audit/proactive-audit-{ISO-date}.md with this format:

<!-- Agent: qa | Task: #N | Session: YYYY-MM-DD -->

# Proactive Audit Report

**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Artifacts Scanned:** N
**Findings:** N CRITICAL, N HIGH, N MEDIUM, N LOW
**Overall:** PASS | FAIL

## Changed Artifacts

- path/to/artifact1 (type: hook)
- path/to/artifact2 (type: skill)

## Findings

### CRITICAL

| ID   | File          | Check  | Detail                 | Remediation      |
| ---- | ------------- | ------ | ---------------------- | ---------------- |
| H-01 | hooks/foo.cjs | Syntax | SyntaxError at line 42 | Fix syntax error |

### HIGH

| ID   | File          | Check | Detail                                      | Remediation                                               |
| ---- | ------------- | ----- | ------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- |
| H-02 | hooks/bar.cjs | SE-02 | JSON.parse at line 15 without safeParseJSON | Import safeParseJSON from .claude/lib/utils/safe-json.cjs |

### MEDIUM

(same table format)

### PASS

| ID   | File          | Check  | Result |
| ---- | ------------- | ------ | ------ |
| H-01 | hooks/baz.cjs | Syntax | OK     |

## Summary

- Total checks run: N
- Passed: N
- Failed: N
- Pass rate: N%

Step 4: Return Verdict

After generating the report:

  • If ANY CRITICAL findings exist: return FAIL with the report path and list of critical findings
  • If ANY HIGH findings exist: return WARN with the report path and list of high findings
  • If only MEDIUM/LOW findings: return PASS with the report path and note about medium findings
  • If no findings: return PASS with the report path

Iron Laws

  1. ALWAYS run every applicable check from the check matrix — skipping "small" changes is how undetected wiring failures accumulate across sessions.
  2. NEVER trust task metadata alone for change detection — use git diff as the primary source of changed artifact paths.
  3. NEVER report PASS without actually executing each check command — self-attested PASS without evidence violates verification-before-completion.
  4. NEVER ignore SE-02 (prototype pollution) findings in hook files — a single compromised hook can corrupt all subsequent tool calls in the pipeline.
  5. ALWAYS validate hook syntax with node --check before reporting findings — broken hooks silently block the entire tool pipeline.

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternWhy It FailsCorrect Approach
Skipping checks for "small" changesSmall wiring failures accumulate silently until a pipeline breaksRun all checks regardless of perceived change size
Trusting task metadata for change detectionMetadata can be incomplete or stale; misses unstaged changesUse git diff --name-only + git ls-files --others as primary source
Self-attesting PASS without running commandsUnverified PASS masks real failures; violates verification-before-completionExecute every check command and capture output as evidence
Ignoring SE-02 (prototype pollution) in hooksOne polluted hook corrupts Object.prototype globally across all tool callsFlag SE-02 as HIGH severity and block pipeline until fixed
Reporting findings without remediation stepsDevelopers know what broke but not how to fix itInclude specific remediation for every finding with file+line reference

Severity Guide

SeverityMeaningAction Required
CRITICALFramework will breakFix immediately, block pipeline completion
HIGHSecurity risk or invisible artifactFix before next session, warn user
MEDIUMMissing integration, incomplete wiringFix in follow-up task
LOWBest practice violation, cosmeticTrack for future improvement

Integration with Router Step 0.7

The router invokes this skill via Step 0.7 in the Router Output Contract (CLAUDE.md Section 0.1). The router:

  1. Detects that framework artifacts were modified during the pipeline
  2. Spawns a QA agent with this skill as the final pipeline step
  3. Reads the audit report
  4. If CRITICAL findings: spawns developer to fix them before claiming completion
  5. If HIGH findings: warns user and notes findings in pipeline summary
  6. If PASS: proceeds to claim pipeline completion

Related Skills

  • verification-before-completion -- General evidence-based completion gates
  • checklist-generator -- IEEE 1028 quality checklists
  • sharp-edges -- Known hazard patterns (SE-01 through SE-07)

Related References

  • .claude/context/plans/proactive-audit-design-2026-02-22.md -- Design document
  • .claude/rules/security.md -- SE-01 and SE-02 patterns
  • .claude/rules/artifact-integration.md -- Must-have integration requirements

平台分布

Codex

32.79%
按下载量换算76

Claude

31.03%
按下载量换算72

Cursor

18.34%
按下载量换算43

Gemini CLI

9.65%
按下载量换算22

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills