audit-support-random-selection

Sub-skill of audit-support: Random Selection (+4).

5 stars

Best use case

audit-support-random-selection is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Sub-skill of audit-support: Random Selection (+4).

Teams using audit-support-random-selection 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

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/random-selection/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/vamseeachanta/workspace-hub/main/.agents/skills/_archive/business/finance/audit-support/random-selection/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/random-selection/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How audit-support-random-selection Compares

Feature / Agentaudit-support-random-selectionStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Sub-skill of audit-support: Random Selection (+4).

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

# Random Selection (+4)

## Random Selection


**When to use:** Default method for transaction-level controls with large populations.

**Method:**
1. Define the population (all transactions subject to the control during the period)
2. Number each item in the population sequentially
3. Use a random number generator to select sample items
4. Ensure no bias in selection (all items have equal probability)

**Advantages:** Statistically valid, defensible, no selection bias
**Disadvantages:** May miss high-risk items, requires complete population listing


## Targeted (Judgmental) Selection


**When to use:** Supplement to random selection for risk-based testing; primary method when population is small or highly varied.

**Method:**
1. Identify items with specific risk characteristics:
   - High dollar amount (above a defined threshold)
   - Unusual or non-standard transactions
   - Period-end transactions (cut-off risk)
   - Related-party transactions
   - Manual or override transactions
   - New vendor/customer transactions
2. Select items matching risk criteria
3. Document rationale for each targeted selection

**Advantages:** Focuses on highest-risk items, efficient use of testing effort
**Disadvantages:** Not statistically representative, may over-represent certain risks


## Haphazard Selection


**When to use:** When random selection is impractical (no sequential population listing) and population is relatively homogeneous.

**Method:**
1. Select items without any specific pattern or bias
2. Ensure selections are spread across the full population period
3. Avoid unconscious bias (don't always pick items at the top, round numbers, etc.)

**Advantages:** Simple, no technology required
**Disadvantages:** Not statistically valid, susceptible to unconscious bias


## Systematic Selection


**When to use:** When population is sequential and you want even coverage across the period.

**Method:**
1. Calculate the sampling interval: Population size / Sample size
2. Select a random starting point within the first interval
3. Select every Nth item from the starting point

**Example:** Population of 1,000, sample of 25 → interval of 40. Random start: item 17. Select items 17, 57, 97, 137, ...

**Advantages:** Even coverage across population, simple to execute
**Disadvantages:** Periodic patterns in the population could bias results


## Sample Size Guidance


| Control Frequency | Expected Population | Low Risk Sample | Moderate Risk Sample | High Risk Sample |
|------------------|--------------------|-----------------|--------------------|-----------------|
| Annual | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Quarterly | 4 | 2 | 2 | 3 |
| Monthly | 12 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Weekly | 52 | 5 | 8 | 15 |
| Daily | ~250 | 20 | 30 | 40 |
| Per-transaction (small pop.) | < 250 | 20 | 30 | 40 |
| Per-transaction (large pop.) | 250+ | 25 | 40 | 60 |

**Factors increasing sample size:**
- Higher inherent risk in the account/process
- Control is the sole control addressing a significant risk (no redundancy)
- Prior period control deficiency identified
- New control (not tested in prior periods)
- External auditor reliance on management testing

Related Skills

llm-wiki-audit-feedback-loop

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Durable feedback loop for correcting llm-wiki pages without losing the correction to chat history. Use when (1) a human notices a wiki page is wrong, outdated, or contradicts a source, (2) processing the `audit/` inbox of a domain wiki, (3) reviewing what feedback has been resolved vs deferred, (4) needing to leave a comment on a specific text range that survives line- number drift. Implements the anchored-text audit file pattern from lewislulu/llm-wiki-skill, adapted for workspace-hub's domain-wiki layout under /mnt/local-analysis/llm-wiki/wikis/<domain>/. Extends the 5-op model (compile/ingest/query/lint) from research/llm-wiki with the missing `audit` op. Never silently delete feedback — rejected audits stay archived with rejection rationale.

pre-completion-cleanup-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Audit and dispose of session residue (orphan files, scratch dirs, sibling-repo state, locks, trash-stages) BEFORE claiming a task complete. Required gate before any agent says "all done", "task complete", or hands work back to user/orchestrator.

repo-mission-portfolio-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Audit the workspace-hub repo portfolio to extract each repo's mission, identify documentation gaps, and prioritize a plan/approval sequence with explicit LLM-wiki weighting for future issue triage.

provider-session-ecosystem-audit-and-exporters

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Build and maintain cross-provider session-log audits for Codex, Codex, Hermes, and Gemini, including exporter design, normalization, and behavioral verification.

orcawave-orcaflex-readiness-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Audit the real readiness of digitalmodel OrcaWave/OrcaFlex spec-driven workflows by reconciling workspace-hub issues, source/tests, semantic-equivalence boundaries, and wiki synthesis gaps.

read-only-pre-implementation-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Systematic cross-check workflow to validate assumptions before TDD coding begins

provider-audit-bootstrap-and-path-classification

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Fix provider-session ecosystem audit failures caused by source-checkout imports and over-aggressive symbolic-path classification.

gtm-site-readiness-audit-local-vs-production

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Audit GTM feature work by separating local artifact readiness from production deployment state, then fix common blockers in aceengineer-website and GTM collateral.

lodging-selection

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Use when recommending lodging inside a trip plan. Encodes the hotel-vs-Airbnb decision matrix, walk-distance gates, never-fabricate-listings rule, and the specific search-criteria template for Airbnb/Vrbo entries. Invoked by trip-planner.

gsd-operational-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Audit a repo's live GSD/get-shit-done workflow state against docs, issues, and runtime outputs to find stale issues, automation reliability gaps, parser drift, migration residue, and policy contradictions.

scientific-problem-selection

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Systematic framework for scientific problem selection, project ideation, troubleshooting stuck projects, and strategic research decisions.

github-issue-label-existence-audit

5
from vamseeachanta/workspace-hub

Prevent GitHub issue creation failures by auditing exact label existence, duplicate titles, and partial-create risk before calling gh issue create.