Skills doc-consistency-reviewer
📦

doc-consistency-reviewer

Content revision r1 High Risk ⚙️ External commands

Review Documentation Consistency

Project documentation often becomes outdated as code changes. This skill compares docs with implementation and produces evidence-based consistency findings.

Supports: Claude Codex Code(CC)
⚠️ 38 Poor

Install with my Agent

Copy this request to your Agent. It includes the canonical Skill page and manifest.

Agent request
Review the Skillstore skill "doc-consistency-reviewer" from https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/manifest. Verify the artifact. Stop and obtain explicit user consent before installing or changing files.

Your Agent should still show its plan and request any confirmation required by the security policy.

Agent-readable resources

Use these links when an AI agent, crawler, or script needs clean context instead of reading the full page.

Markdown detail GET /skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer.md Signed manifest GET /api/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/manifest Signed lockfile GET /api/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/lockfile

Test it

Using "doc-consistency-reviewer". Review README.md before release.

Expected outcome:

The report highlights one major mismatch in setup instructions, one missing environment variable, and several outdated feature descriptions.

Using "doc-consistency-reviewer". Check API docs against implementation.

Expected outcome:

The review lists endpoint, parameter, and response-field differences, with severity, impact, evidence locations, and suggested documentation updates.

Using "doc-consistency-reviewer". Audit security documentation.

Expected outcome:

The result flags security claims that do not match configuration, then recommends whether docs or implementation should change.

Security Audit

High Risk
v8 • 7/6/2026 Open versioned report

Static external-command findings are false positives from markdown fences, inline path formatting, and JSON strings. The entropy findings are false positives because the files are readable markdown. Semantic review found an embedded audit output file that claims the skill is safe and all findings are false positives.

4
Files scanned
712
Lines analyzed
0
Review items
0
False positives ignored

Confirmed security concerns (1)

High
evaluation-output.json:15-18
Prompt Injection Attempt Detected
evaluation-output.json embeds self-approval claims: "risk_level: safe", "safe_to_publish: true", and "All 36 static findings are false positives." These claims can bias an automated reviewer if the file is loaded as skill context.
The file directly asserts safety and false-positive status inside the skill package. It lacks an explicit override command, but matches the suspicious self-approval pattern.

Risk Factors

⚙️ External commands (41)
evaluation-output.json:18-24 evaluation-output.json:24-30 evaluation-output.json:30-36 evaluation-output.json:36-42 evaluation-output.json:42-48 evaluation-output.json:48-54 evaluation-output.json:54-60 evaluation-output.json:60-66 evaluation-output.json:66-72 evaluation-output.json:72-78 evaluation-output.json:78-84 evaluation-output.json:84-90 evaluation-output.json:90-96 evaluation-output.json:96-102 evaluation-output.json:102-108 evaluation-output.json:108-114 evaluation-output.json:114-120 evaluation-output.json:120-126 evaluation-output.json:126-132 evaluation-output.json:132-138 evaluation-output.json:138-144 evaluation-output.json:144-150 evaluation-output.json:150-156 evaluation-output.json:156-162 evaluation-output.json:162-168 evaluation-output.json:168-174 evaluation-output.json:174-180 evaluation-output.json:180-186 evaluation-output.json:186-192 evaluation-output.json:192-198 evaluation-output.json:198-204 evaluation-output.json:204-210 references/output-format.md:30-31 references/output-format.md:31-34 SKILL.md:23-28 SKILL.md:28-61 SKILL.md:61-64 SKILL.md:64-71 SKILL.md:71-75 SKILL.md:75-80 SKILL.md:80-94
Audited by: codex View Audit History →
Share & cite this report

Share the versioned assessment report, neutral badge, embed card, and citations. Skillstore reports evidence without deciding whether this Skill is safe.

Open versioned report
Security Assessment

Copy report link

https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/audits/8?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdown badge

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTML badge

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

Embed card

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>
Academic citations (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA citation

hylarucoder. (2026). doc-consistency-reviewer security audit report (audit version 8) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/audits/8

BibTeX citation

@techreport{hylarucoder-hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer-2026, author = {hylarucoder}, title = {doc-consistency-reviewer security audit report (audit version 8)}, institution = {Skillstore}, year = {2026}, number = {8}, url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/audits/8}, note = {Author version unspecified} }

CITATION.cff

cff-version: 1.2.0 message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report." title: "doc-consistency-reviewer security audit report (audit version 8)" version: "unspecified" type: report authors: - name: "hylarucoder" date-released: "2026-07-06" url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer/audits/8" identifiers: - type: other value: "skillstore:hylarucoder-doc-consistency-reviewer:audit:8" description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Skillstore Score

Why this score Evidence Confidence: Medium
41
Architecture
85
Maintainability
87
Content
70
Community
83
Spec Compliance

What You Can Build

Prepare release docs

Audit README and docs before release so published instructions match current behavior.

Verify API reference

Check endpoint, parameter, and response documentation against implementation contracts.

Review security claims

Validate documentation about sandboxing, authentication, CORS, or permissions against actual configuration.

Try These Prompts

Review README Basics 
Review README.md against the implementation. List outdated claims, missing features, and commands that do not match the code.
Check API Documentation 
Compare docs/api.md with the API routes and schema files. Report endpoint, parameter, response, and error-code mismatches.
Audit Configuration Docs 
Review configuration and environment variable documentation against source code, package scripts, and deployment files. Prioritize issues that break setup.
Run Full Consistency Audit 
Perform a full documentation consistency audit for README.md, docs, contracts, configs, and security notes. Produce a prioritized report with evidence and fixes.

Best Practices

  • Treat source code, schemas, and configuration as the source of truth.
  • Review high-severity findings first, especially security or setup claims.
  • Keep each finding tied to exact document and implementation evidence.

Avoid

  • Accepting a documentation claim without locating implementation evidence.
  • Mixing speculative concerns with confirmed inconsistencies in one report.
  • Ignoring generated docs, API schemas, or package scripts during review.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this skill change files?
It produces a report. It does not rewrite documentation unless the user separately asks for edits.
Which documentation does it review?
It focuses on README files, Markdown docs, API references, configuration docs, and security notes.
What is the source of truth?
The skill prioritizes source code, schema files, configuration, package scripts, and tests.
Can it review Chinese or bilingual docs?
Yes. The instructions support multilingual documentation when evidence is available in the project.
How are severities assigned?
P0 covers security or severe misdirection. P1 affects core usage. P2 and P3 cover smaller accuracy or presentation issues.
When should I use it?
Use it before releases, after large refactors, during API changes, or when onboarding docs seem unreliable.

Developer Details

License

MIT

Skillstore revision

r1

Version notice

The author did not declare a version.

Repository

https://github.com/hylarucoder/skills-for-vibe-coder/tree/main/skills/doc-consistency-reviewer

Ref

a06681402992ceae98ba04d54cfd4ab004862696

Maintenance freshness

7/18/2026

Usage

5 downloads · 168 views

File structure

📁 references/

📄 checklist.md

📄 output-format.md

📄 evaluation-output.json

📄 SKILL.md