Best use case
audit-report is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Phase 3: Generate and present audit report for user review
Teams using audit-report should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/audit-report/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How audit-report Compares
| Feature / Agent | audit-report | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Phase 3: Generate and present audit report for user review
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Phase 3: Report
Generate a human-readable audit report and present to the user for review before applying corrections.
## What This Phase Does
1. Merge three-layer findings: mechanical + Gemini per-footnote + Claude cross-footnote review (**mechanical > Claude > Gemini priority** — see audit-check merge rules)
2. Categorize by issue type and severity
3. Flag items needing manual review (low-confidence cross-refs, ambiguous citations)
4. Generate `scratch/AUDIT_REPORT.md`
5. Present summary to user
### Three-Layer Merge Priority
**Mechanical > Claude cross-review > Gemini per-footnote**
- Mechanical findings (signal italic, terminal periods, Id. chains, small caps patterns) are deterministic and **must never be dropped**
- Claude cross-review adds cross-footnote patterns (supra chains, hereinafter consistency) and filters Gemini false positives
- Gemini per-footnote adds individual source type classification and abbreviation checks
## Report Structure
```markdown
# Bluebook Audit Report
## Summary
- Total footnotes: N
- Clean: N (XX%)
- Issues found: N across M footnotes
## Fix Counts by Category
| Category | Count | Auto-fixable |
|----------|-------|-------------|
| Journal name small caps | N | Yes |
| Book title small caps | N | Yes |
| Cross-reference resolution | N | Yes (high confidence) |
| Id. chain errors | N | Partial |
| Signal formatting | N | Yes |
| Terminal periods | N | Yes |
| Typeface errors (other) | N | Manual |
## Issues by Footnote
[sorted by footnote number]
## Items Needing Manual Review
[low-confidence cross-refs, ambiguous citations, judgment calls]
## Correct As-Is (Gemini False Positives)
[Items Gemini flagged but are actually correct, with reasoning]
[Group by source type: SEC releases (roman), exec orders (roman), etc.]
[Reference: audit-patterns.md Source Type Typeface Reference table]
```
### Why "Correct As-Is" Matters
Many Gemini suggestions are wrong — especially for non-standard source types (SEC releases, exec orders, working paper designations). Documenting WHY these are correct:
1. Prevents re-flagging if someone re-runs the audit
2. Forces the reviewer to consciously evaluate each judgment call
3. Creates a record of the source type classification decisions
## Gate: Exit Report
This is a **user gate**. The workflow pauses here.
- [ ] `scratch/AUDIT_REPORT.md` exists
- [ ] User has reviewed the report
- [ ] User approves proceeding to corrections
**Do NOT proceed to corrections without user acknowledgment.**
## Next Phase
After user approval:
Read `${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../../../../skills/bluebook-audit/skills/audit-correct/SKILL.md` and follow its instructions.Related Skills
audit-verify
Phase 5: Verify all corrections were applied correctly
audit-extract
Phase 1: Extract footnotes from DOCX with formatting annotations
audit-crossrefs
Phase 7: Convert hardcoded cross-references to auto-updating NOTEREF fields
audit-correct
Phase 4: Apply corrections to DOCX
audit-check
Phase 2: Run mechanical checks and Gemini formatted audit
audit-archive
Phase 6: Archive URLs via perma.cc
bluebook-audit
This skill should be used when the user asks to 'audit footnotes', 'check Bluebook formatting', 'audit citations', 'run footnote audit', 'check my footnotes', 'bluebook audit', or needs systematic Bluebook compliance checking of a law review manuscript.
audit-fix-loop
Canonical doctrine for scored iterative improvement, and the generic fallback for ad-hoc 'iteratively improve / audit and fix / grade and improve / hill-climb quality / score and fix' requests that don't map to a domain workflow.
writing
This skill should be used when the user asks to 'write a paper', 'start a writing project', 'draft an article', 'write about', 'brainstorm writing topics', 'gather sources for a paper', 'what should I write about', or needs the writing workflow entry point for any writing task.
writing-validate
Validate draft sections cover all PRECIS claims before review.
writing-setup
Internal skill for creating PRECIS.md, OUTLINE.md, and ACTIVE_WORKFLOW.md. Called after brainstorm sources are gathered.
writing-revise
This skill should be used when the user asks to 'revise writing', 'fix review issues', 'polish draft', 'apply review feedback', 'complete writing workflow', or after /writing-review produces REVIEW.md with issues to fix.