{
  "artifact_path": ".reports/codex/audit/<timestamp>/result.json",
  "checks_failed": [],
  "checks_run": [
    "lint",
    "format",
    "types",
    "tests",
    "review"
  ],
  "confidence": 0.0,
  "findings": {
    "critical": 0,
    "high": 0,
    "low": 0,
    "medium": 0
  },
  "follow_up": [],
  "metadata": {
    "confidence_gap_closures": [],
    "confidence_gaps": [],
    "confidence_recovery": {
      "evidence": [
        "objective audit evidence"
      ],
      "final_confidence": 0.0,
      "initial_confidence": 0.0,
      "recovery_actions": [
        "recovery action"
      ],
      "remaining_limits": [
        "residual limit"
      ],
      "status": "shared-confidence-band-status"
    },
    "final_handoff": {
      "branch": "standard",
      "handoff_path": ".reports/codex/audit/<timestamp>/final-handoff.json",
      "handoff_sha256": "sha256",
      "rendered_path": ".reports/codex/audit/<timestamp>/final.md",
      "rendered_sha256": "sha256",
      "schema_version": 1,
      "validation_path": ".reports/codex/audit/<timestamp>/final-handoff.validation.json"
    },
    "value_per_token": {
      "baseline_sha256": "",
      "behavioral_comparison": {},
      "candidate_sha256": "",
      "conditional_load_trace": [],
      "decision": "",
      "live_comparison": {},
      "obligation_map_path": "",
      "residual_limits": [],
      "schema_version": 1,
      "scope_roots": [],
      "static_gates": [],
      "static_measurements": [],
      "status": "not-run|insufficient-evidence|rejected|accepted"
    }
  },
  "recommendations": [],
  "schema_version": 2,
  "status": "pass|fail|timeout"
}

---
name: audit
description: Audit Codex configuration and workflow contracts, including failures between individually successful steps, plus prompt-efficiency drift; emit evidence-backed gaps and measurable gates.
---

> Before asking, read [User Questions](../../shared/codex-user-questions.md).

# Audit

Run linear configuration/workflow audit.

> Unless `skip_gate=true` or a fix level is already supplied, present ranked findings and ask which findings or severity levels should be proposed for remediation, including `No fixes`; accept existing indexes/ranges or severity syntax through User Questions. Record the bound choice in `audit-ledger.md`. Pending input stays unresolved; choosing a fix level does not turn this audit into an implementation run.

## Input Schema

```json
{
  "scope": "config|skills|roles|all",
  "target": "optional path",
  "mode": "upgrade|adversarial",
  "axis": "standard|value-per-token",
  "min_cost_reduction": "optional fraction; default 0.05 for value-per-token acceptance",
  "skip_gate": false,
  "done_when": "drift and broken references are ranked with gate result; fix level chosen interactively unless skip_gate=true"
}
```

## Workflow (Exact Commands)

### 01: Create run directory

Run `create_run.py --skill audit` per `../../shared/helper-cli-contract.md`.

### 02: Normalize scope and collect inventory

Scopes:

- `config`: project `.codex/config.toml`, `AGENTS.md` layers, permissions, and routing.
- `skills`: repository/user-authored `.agents/skills/**` plus declared calibration coverage.
- `roles`: role-routing instructions and explicitly supplied plugin/package role-card root.
- `all`: every applicable surface above. Missing optional local skills or roles is `not-configured`, not drift.

Run `rg --files` with the `AGENTS.md`, `.codex/config.toml`, `.agents/skills/**` globs as argv. When `target` is supplied and exists, enumerate regular files under it to depth four with platform-native filesystem walk. Sort and deduplicate both result sets into `<run-directory>/inventory.txt`; record unavailable inputs or collection failures.

### 03: Build an audit ledger before running gates

Write `<run-directory>/audit-ledger.md` with these sections:

- `Inventory`: configured/present policy, skills, and role-routing surfaces.
- `Broken References`: missing files, stale paths, unresolved shared resources.
- `Runtime Leaks`: non-native runner fields/external runtime assumptions.
- `Coverage`: calibration benchmark/behavior.
- `Overlap`: duplicate/fuzzy ownership decisions.
- `Prompt Efficiency`: instruction cost, loaded context, obligation preservation, and value-guard evidence.
- `Recommendations`: ranked fixes.

### Explore workflow outcomes before checking conformance

For a workflow-bearing target, follow its actual entrypoint through helpers, state changes, handoffs, the next ordinary user action. Read the relevant callers and consumers even when unchanged. Start from the user's intended outcome; existing instructions, accepted design decisions, green tests are evidence to question, not proof that the contract is sufficient. Keep the exploration bounded to reachable behavior, explicitly record excluded paths. For a static target with no workflow, record why this check is not applicable.

Write `<run-directory>/workflow-exploration.md` with `Transitions`, `Counterexamples`, `Coverage` sections, including an explicit reason in each section when no workflow applies. Use a compact transition table: `Step / actor | Required precondition | Observed postcondition | Next consumer / user action | Evidence / gap`. For each material handoff ask:

- What does the producer actually guarantee, what stronger property does the consumer assume? Distinguish matching content or value from identity, ownership, authority, lifetime, and destination.
- Can every local check succeed while the end result is wrong, temporary, unrecoverable, or misleading to the user? What retains the result after the next normal action?
- What happens when the same flow starts from another currently supported state, resumes, retries, or encounters a change between verification and use? Check those states that the implementation or documented use makes reachable; avoid invented risk matrices.
- What observable example would disprove the claimed safety or completion? Does the existing test assert the user's outcome or merely repeat the implementation's chosen operation?

Probe the highest-impact unproven assumption with the smallest safe executable check or source-backed counterexample. Retain its inputs, expected outcome, actual result, rejected alternative; proposed/unavailable probes remain gaps. Include a positive case to distinguish a missing guarantee from a deliberately valid alternative. Audit remains read-only: parent-owned disposable probes may write scratch data within existing authorization; production edits and external actions keep their own scope and permission boundaries.

Report tested transitions separately from untested coverage. A passing inventory, schema validator, command, or existing regression suite cannot close an untested end-to-end claim. Generalize demonstrated mechanisms into recommendations; keep incident-specific names and benchmark answers out of shipped instructions.

### 04: Audit prompt efficiency without using length as quality

Always write `<run-directory>/prompt-efficiency.md` with `Measurement`, `Cost Baseline`, `Loaded Context`, `Obligation Map`, `Value Guards`, `Adversarial Review`, `Recommendations` sections. For `scope=config|roles` with no skill target, record `not-applicable` and why. For `scope=skills|all` or `axis=value-per-token`, audit each discovered local skill root independently; absent optional Codex Rig, Codemap, or Bridge root is `not-configured`, never cross-plugin dependency or failure.

Measure with matched provider-native token counts; else local `tiktoken` with `o200k_base`; else deterministic UTF-8 bytes and words. Never install tokenizer or use network access. Counts are cost evidence, never quality evidence; proxy-only comparison cannot accept candidate, remains `insufficient-evidence`.

For each baseline/candidate pair, use same file set and record hashes, measurement source, static cost, loaded referenced instructions, conditional-load decisions, cost of every reference required by exercised path. A moved instruction is not saving when same run must load it. Map every baseline obligation to its candidate location and evidence, covering safety, ordering, user approval, output/schema, fail-fast, tool-permission, quality-gate requirements.

Value Guards must record exact package/tests, behavioral and calibration results, contract-marker coverage, tool/check failures, completion quality. A live comparison must use paired tasks with same model, effort, task contract, and prompt identity; record native token/cost fields and confidence limits. Treat missing paired live evidence as `insufficient-evidence` for material behavior claim.

Any candidate that removes, moves, or condenses obligations requires adversarial review of obligation map. Accept only when all hard guards pass, no critical behavior regresses, tool/check failures don't increase, normalized cost falls by `min_cost_reduction`; otherwise reject or mark insufficient evidence. A shorter candidate fails when it loses obligation, weakens guard, hides loaded-reference cost, or lacks required evidence. Value-per-token scores may rank already accepted candidates but never override hard gates.

### 05: Route specialists only when triggered

For `scope=all`, `mode=adversarial`, audits crossing skills, agents, CI/config, or material prompt compression, read, apply `../../shared/specialist-orchestration.md`; never load it for narrow single-surface audit. Write `<run-directory>/specialist-audit-plan.md` packs for:

- `curator`: skill/agent/config drift, duplication, calibration hygiene.
- `linting-expert`: Markdown, Python, shell, ruff/mypy/pre-commit references.
- `cicd-steward`: CI harness, workflow permissions, artifact behavior.
- `challenger`: adversarial check of no-finding or low-risk conclusions.

Stay single-agent for narrow `scope=config`, `scope=skills`, or `scope=roles` audits where same inventory would go to every specialist.

For material prompt compression, `challenger` must independently inspect obligation map and cost/quality decision. Specialist disagreement is evidence to reconcile, not vote.

### 06: Run shared quality gates

Follow `../../shared/helper-cli-contract.md` and `python PLUGIN_ROOT/shared/run_gates.py --help`. Use project-configured lint, format, type, test commands for discovered surfaces, explicit reasons for inapplicable gates, clean diff review.

### 07: Detect drift and broken references

Run `rg -n` for `config_file|skills/|roles/|quality-gates|run_gates.py|write-result.py` over existing `AGENTS.md`, `.codex`, `.agents`, and optional target. Write results to `<run-directory>/reference-scan.txt`; record missing inputs or command failure explicitly.

**Structural context (optional)**: when audited scope contains Python package, also probe codemap-py once for undocumented public surface and externally-uncalled modules: `python PLUGIN_ROOT/shared/codemap_adapter.py context --category audit --out <run-directory>/codemap-context.json`. Per `../../shared/codemap-contract.md`, absence/incompatibility is non-fatal — continue with reference scan above, using persisted evidence as additional signal, never replacement for it.

### 08: Audit spawn-pattern coverage and overlap in `AGENTS.md` (instruction-level check)

Run two separate `rg -n` argv scans: `delegat|specialist|spawn|role|\[agents\.` over existing `AGENTS.md` and `.codex/config.toml`, writing `<run-directory>/spawn-sections.txt`; then `Trigger and skip boundaries|TRIGGER when|SKIP when|NOT for` over supplied target or `AGENTS.md`, writing `<run-directory>/spawn-policy-sections.txt`. Record missing inputs or command failure explicitly.

### 09: Review native skill and agent contract consistency

Each configured skill has:

- `Input Schema`
- `Workflow`
- `Fail-Fast Rules`
- `Quality Gates`
- `Calibration Hooks`
- `Output Contract`

Each configured role or agent has:

- `## Scope` or clear role boundary text
- `## Evidence Standard`
- `## Boundaries`
- `## Output Contract` or explicit output format

### 10: Review role-roster consistency when a role-card target is supplied

When target is supplied, run `rg -n` for `^(role_id|name|model|description|developer_instructions)` over that exact target and write `<run-directory>/role-roster-scan.txt`; record scan failure. Without target, create that artifact as empty file and classify role roster as not configured.

Classify overlap as `keep`, `sharpen`, `merge-prune`:

- `keep`: distinct decision surface.
- `sharpen`: role stays; tighten boundary.
- `merge-prune`: no distinct acceptance criterion.

### 11: Classify findings using `../../shared/severity-map.md`

### 12: Write mandatory result artifact

Use shared lifecycle/authoritative help. Write `AUDIT_METADATA`, validate `audit`, promote only validated candidate.

## Fail-fast Rules

01. Requested target missing or escaping consuming project/approved external scope => fail.
02. Shared gate script missing => fail.
03. Critical-path broken config/skill reference => fail.
04. Any configured role/agent lacks routing coverage => fail.
05. Unclear/overlapping spawn intent lacks collaboration-team guidance => fail.
06. Agent overlap lacks keep/sharpen/merge-prune decision => fail.
07. Configured entry lacks its declared skill/role contract section => fail unless exception recorded.
08. Non-native runtime assumptions in audited skill or role card => fail.
09. Result artifact missing => fail.
10. `prompt-efficiency.md` or its required evidence sections missing => fail.
11. Prompt candidate accepted from raw length/proxy alone, without obligation mapping, hard value guards, loaded-reference cost, required adversarial review, matched live identity, or declared material reduction => fail.
12. `axis=value-per-token` requested without `scope=skills|all` or supplied target containing skill root => fail.

## Quality Gates

Required checks:

- `review`: inventory, contract ledger, workflow-exploration transitions/counterexamples or explicit inapplicability, prompt-efficiency evidence, reference scan, overlap decisions, `git diff --check`.
- `calibration`: run owning project's declared calibration command when audited workflow behavior changes; for Codex Rig source, use `runtime/calibration/run.py --layout plugin`.

Conditional checks:

- `lint`/`format`: when Python/TOML/shell/Markdown formatters available.
- `tests`: with executable probes/behavior-changing fixes.

## Calibration Hooks

Update calibration when audit scope, contract requirements, or routing checks change:

- benchmark patterns: `audit`, every configured skill, every configured agent
- behavioral cases: runtime leak detection, stale reference handling, overlap classification, unsafe sync recommendation, length-only compression, missing loaded-reference cost, missing paired evidence, critical behavior regression, and below-threshold cost reduction

## Output Contract

Before writing result candidate, follow `../../shared/final-handoff-contract.md`: render and bind `final-handoff.json`, `final.md`, and `final-handoff.validation.json`; after both validators and promotion pass, emit `final.md` verbatim.

Use `../../shared/quality-gates.md`.

### Final chat

Final chat follows shared frame with `Next steps`. `Outcome`: `accepted|rejected|insufficient-evidence`. `Results`: exactly `Item | Severity / impact | Decision | Evidence | Next action`, one row/material item. `Remaining`: owner and closure action.

`AUDIT_METADATA.value_per_token` records schema version, status (`not-run|insufficient-evidence|rejected|accepted`), scope roots, baseline/candidate hashes, static measurements, conditional-load trace, obligation-map path, static gates, behavioral/live comparisons, decision, and residual limits.

Minimum artifact payload template: `result-template.json`.