discrepancy-audit

Audits EnvGene documentation against code and schemas to produce a verdict table of discrepancies.

8|15|Updated Jan 17, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Netcracker/qubership-envgene --skill discrepancy-audit-netcracker
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: discrepancy-audit
Source: https://github.com/Netcracker/qubership-envgene/tree/main/.claude/skills/discrepancy-audit
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Netcracker/qubership-envgene --skill discrepancy-audit-netcracker

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Documentation drifts from code over time, and manually reconciling docs against implementation across a large repository is slow and error-prone. This Skill runs a topic-scoped, report-only audit that reconciles EnvGene docs against code, schemas, and other docs, emitting a fact-oriented verdict table without editing any documentation. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Five-phase audit pipeline: scope resolution, claim extraction, truth location, verdict assignment, and report generation, with a user-confirmed corpus before auditing begins. - Fact-oriented verdict model: classifies each claim as contradiction, doc-ahead, doc-vs-doc (code breaks tie or code silent), unverifiable, or consistent, with a hard evidence-pair gate requiring doc and code file:line citations. - Parallel execution with re-verification: fans out Explore agents and per-slice workers for wide corpora, then re-verifies every delegated finding in the main context before it enters the report. - Use Case: Ask how EnvGene handles SSL certificates; the Skill assembles the relevant docs, the handle_certs.sh entry point, and schemas, extracts checkable claims, and returns a verdict table showing where docs and code diverge. ## Quick Start Run /discrepancy-audit with a topic such as "how EnvGene handles SSL certificates" to receive a verdict table reconciling the docs against the code.

Frequently Asked Questions about discrepancy-audit

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I audit documentation against code for discrepancies?

Invoke /discrepancy-audit with a topic. The Skill resolves a corpus of docs, code entry points, and schemas, extracts checkable claims, locates truth anchors in code, and emits a verdict table classifying each claim as contradiction, doc-ahead, doc-vs-doc, unverifiable, or consistent.

What verdicts does a documentation discrepancy audit produce?

The verdict model includes contradiction (code differs from doc), doc-ahead (documented but unimplemented), doc-vs-doc with code breaking the tie or staying silent, unverifiable (pure prose), and consistent. Every row except doc-ahead and unverifiable requires a doc quote plus a code file:line evidence pair.

Does discrepancy-audit edit or fix documentation?

No. The Skill is report-only and never authors or edits docs. Resolution is handed off to downstream skills like design-to-cr or writing-docs; it reports the fact of a discrepancy and leaves the fix direction to the human.

When should I not use the discrepancy-audit skill?

Do not use it for general PR reviews, doc editing requests, single-identifier factual questions, or code-versus-standards checks. Those belong to bdd-test-review, writing-docs, or code-review. It fires only on the explicit /discrepancy-audit trigger.

How does the audit handle large documentation corpora?

Wide topics fan out to Explore agents for corpus gathering and per-slice workers for claim extraction and truth location. All subagent findings are treated as candidates and re-verified in the main context before entering the report; narrow topics run inline.