Automation Audit Ops

affaan-m/ECC/skills/automation-audit-ops

作者 affaan-mef648e01899ba3e8dc6371642deaaf64b4477775無授權條款275K 個星標收錄於 2026年10月9日更新於 2026年10月9日儲存庫4 天前更新

Evidence-first automation inventory and overlap audit workflow for ECC. Use when the user wants to know which jobs, hooks, connectors, MCP servers, or wrappers are live, broken, redundant, or missing before fixing anything.

AI 產生的概覽

稽核正在運作的自動化、工作、鉤子、連接器與 MCP 伺服器,並提出保留、合併、裁撤或優先修復的建議。

功能
此技能對自動化介面進行以證據為先的稽核:儲存庫鉤子、GitHub Actions 與排程工作流程、MCP 設定與已啟用的伺服器、連接器、應用程式整合以及包裝指令碼。它依運作狀態(已設定、已驗證、近期驗證過、過時或損壞、完全缺失)與問題類型逐項分類,並追溯具體的證據路徑,例如檔案路徑、工作流程執行紀錄、鉤子日誌或失敗特徵。最後輸出保留、合併、裁撤或優先修復的建議組合,並依固定格式呈現目前介面、發現、建議與下一步動作。
適用情境
當使用者詢問哪些自動化正在運作、哪些已損壞、哪些重複或缺失,或想了解哪些工具與連接器真正發揮作用時使用。它適合已累積多種重複做法、需要在動手修復前收斂為單一標準路徑的工作區。
執行需求
不附帶指令碼,僅為指示。它假定代理程式能讀取實際工作區介面,例如鉤子指令碼、工作流程定義、MCP 與連接器設定、日誌與指令輸出。其中引用的其他 ECC 原生技能為選用輸入。

Automation Audit Ops

Use this when the user asks what automations are live, which jobs are broken, where overlap exists, or what tooling and connectors are actually doing useful work right now.

This is an audit-first operator skill. The job is to produce an evidence-backed inventory and a keep / merge / cut / fix-next recommendation set before rewriting anything.

Skill Stack

Pull these ECC-native skills into the workflow when relevant:

  • workspace-surface-audit for connector, MCP, hook, and app inventory
  • knowledge-ops when the audit needs to reconcile live repo truth with durable context
  • github-ops when the answer depends on CI, scheduled workflows, issues, or PR automation
  • ecc-tools-cost-audit when the real problem is webhook fanout, queued jobs, or billing burn in the sibling app repo
  • research-ops when local inventory must be compared against current platform support or public docs
  • verification-loop for proving post-fix state instead of relying on assumed recovery

When to Use

  • user asks "what automations do I have", "what is live", "what is broken", or "what overlaps"
  • the task spans cron jobs, GitHub Actions, local hooks, MCP servers, connectors, wrappers, or app integrations
  • the user wants to know what was ported from another agent system and what still needs to be rebuilt inside ECC
  • the workspace has accumulated multiple ways to do the same thing and the user wants one canonical lane

Guardrails

  • start read-only unless the user explicitly asked for fixes
  • separate:
    • configured
    • authenticated
    • recently verified
    • stale or broken
    • missing entirely
  • do not claim a tool is live just because a skill or config references it
  • do not merge or delete overlapping surfaces until the evidence table exists

Workflow

1. Inventory the real surface

Read the current live surface before theorizing:

  • repo hooks and local hook scripts
  • GitHub Actions and scheduled workflows
  • MCP configs and enabled servers
  • connector- or app-backed integrations
  • wrapper scripts and repo-specific automation entrypoints

Group them by surface:

  • local runtime
  • repo CI / automation
  • connected external systems
  • messaging / notifications
  • billing / customer operations
  • research / monitoring

2. Classify each item by live state

For every surfaced automation, mark:

  • configured
  • authenticated
  • recently verified
  • stale or broken
  • missing

Then classify the problem type:

  • active breakage
  • auth outage
  • stale status
  • overlap or redundancy
  • missing capability

3. Trace the proof path

Back every important claim with a concrete source:

  • file path
  • workflow run
  • hook log
  • config entry
  • recent command output
  • exact failure signature

If the current state is ambiguous, say so directly instead of pretending the audit is complete.

4. End with keep / merge / cut / fix-next

For each overlapping or suspect surface, return one call:

  • keep
  • merge
  • cut
  • fix next

The value is in collapsing noisy automation into one canonical ECC lane, not in preserving every historical path.

Output Format

text
CURRENT SURFACE- automation- source- live state- proof
FINDINGS- active breakage- overlap- stale status- missing capability
RECOMMENDATION- keep- merge- cut- fix next
NEXT ECC MOVE- exact skill / hook / workflow / app lane to strengthen

Pitfalls

  • do not answer from memory when the live inventory can be read
  • do not treat "present in config" as "working"
  • do not fix lower-value redundancy before naming the broken high-signal path
  • do not widen the task into a repo rewrite if the user asked for inventory first

Verification

  • important claims cite a live proof path
  • each surfaced automation is labeled with a clear live-state category
  • the final recommendation distinguishes keep / merge / cut / fix-next

來源與署名

來源:affaan-m/ECC位於skills/automation-audit-ops提交ef648e0

授權條款: 無授權條款

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架