audit-analysis

audit-analysis is a skill for Claude Code from claesbackman/AI-research-feedback. It costs 71 tokens per session (1,022 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An independent review of changed research code against a chosen base version, looking for mistakes in how data and statistical models are built. It covers areas such as samples, data joins, variable creation, clustering, and fixed effects, which are statistical ways to account for grouped or repeated observations.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to audit the differences between a branch and a base Git reference, such as main, before circulating results or submitting analysis.
Why use it?
It can uncover errors that produce incorrect research results or silently change the analysis before the work is shared or submitted.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: mentions subagents.

Good fit Use it to audit the differences between a branch and a base Git reference, such as main, before circulating results or submitting analysis.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/claesbackman/ai-research-feedback/audit-analysis
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add claesbackman/AI-research-feedback --skill audit-analysis
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/claesbackman/AI-research-feedback

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for audit-analysis

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/claesbackman/ai-research-feedback/audit-analysis.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/claesbackman/ai-research-feedback/audit-analysis)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/claesbackman/ai-research-feedback/audit-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/claesbackman/ai-research-feedback/audit-analysis.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 71 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,022 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00071 $0.01022
Opus 5 $0.00036 $0.00511
Sonnet 5 $0.00014 $0.00204
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00102

Measured 8d ago against content hash 712a5c092697, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-08, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

audit-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

Skills/audit-analysis/SKILL.md · 68 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 68 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Audit Analysis Code

Find errors in changed empirical code before a referee does.

The audit runs in a subagent with a clean context. That isolation is the point: whoever wrote the code — including this session, if it helped — must not be able to steer the findings. Do not read the changed files yourself before launching, do not form a view, and do not answer the auditor's questions mid-run.

Phase 1: Establish scope

Set BASE from $ARGUMENTS if given, otherwise main.

Run, and stop with a short explanation if any of the first three fail:

  • git rev-parse --git-dir — must be a repository
  • git rev-parse --verify BASE — the base ref must exist
  • git diff --stat BASE — if empty, there is nothing to audit
  • git log BASE..HEAD --oneline — may legitimately be empty when the work is uncommitted, or when HEAD is BASE and only the working tree has changed. Note it and drop the commit-message check from the audit.

Report to the user in two or three lines: base ref, number of changed files, number of changed lines, and whether commit messages are available. Then launch immediately.

Phase 2: Launch the auditor

One Agent call, subagent_type: "general-purpose". Substitute BASE and pass this verbatim:

Review empirical research code adversarially. The author wants it broken now rather than by a referee. Read git log BASE..HEAD and git diff BASE, then the changed files in full. Follow variables built outside the diff.

Check, and report on each of:

  • Claims vs. code: do comments and commit messages match what runs? Quote both sides of any disagreement.
  • Sample: N before and after every filter, merge, and collapse. Take N from logs; write "N unverified" where there is no log. Flag undocumented drops.
  • Merges: key, uniqueness on the side that needs it, fate of unmatched observations, whether _merge is inspected, duplicate id-period pairs after.
  • Variables: trace every regressor and outcome. Units, logs vs. levels, deflation, lag alignment. Does construction match the name?
  • Silent failures: missings coerced to zero, if x > 0 true on missing, destring ... force, replace that changes nothing, loops that skip. In Python, fillna(0), silent dtype coercion, chained assignment.
  • Estimation: clustering level and cluster count, what the fixed effects absorb, weights, whether estimation N matches the sample traced above.

Each finding: file, line, quoted excerpt, what is wrong, consequence for the results. Tag CONFIRMED (visible in the code) or SUSPECTED (needs the data). Style and naming are not findings. Order by consequence, worst first, ten max. Then one line per category: what you found, or that you found nothing. Close with the one thing you could not check without the data. Change nothing.

Read the full file on GitHub · 68 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 68 lines · 71 tokens per session scan A 712a5c092697

Subscribe to this mod's changes

audit-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository claesbackman/AI-research-feedback (477 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 71 tokens to every session and 1,022 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.