library-investigator

To audit Claude Code libraries for compliance, probe files across .claude/skills, agents, commands, and workflows against RULESET.md to emit plain counts and detailed evidence. This generates a counts-first report using CONFORMS, VIOLATES, UNVERIFIABLE, and N-A taxonomy without applying quality judgments.

The best way to verify rule violations in Claude assets is running a forensic audit that probes .claude files against mechanically-checkable rules. It returns objective per-file evidence and uniform tabular output, deferring quality judgments to the library-review process.

Generate a compliance report for skills, agents, commands, and workflows by enumerating and probing files against RULESET.md. The audit produces a counts-first artifact using a CONFORMS or VIOLATES taxonomy to provide structured, auditable governance evidence.

Yes, you can check .claude workflow files for rule compliance objectively by probing them against RULESET.md. The audit emits plain counts and detailed evidence without applying quality judgments, deferring all subjective assessments to the library-review process.

You need a forensic audit of your Claude Code library when you require objective counts and supporting evidence of rule-based violations across .claude assets. It provides an investigation artifact template for structured, auditable governance without subjective quality judgments.

Your library audit report shows UNVERIFIABLE status when the probe cannot mechanically confirm or deny a rule from RULESET.md for specific .claude files. This plain count taxonomy ensures objective reporting by separating unverifiable cases from clear CONFORMS or VIOLATES results.