Agent skill

Validate Consistency

by jeremylongshore in jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

Universal document consistency auditor. An agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace.

MITAuto-check passedDevelopment

Install Validate Consistency

skills CLI
$ npx skills add jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace --skill validate-consistency -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace validate-consistency --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/.curated/validate-consistency .claude/skills/validate-consistency && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
validate-consistency
GitHub stars
2.8k
Token cost
~5.7k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,285 words
Files
3 (incl. references)
Skills in repo
3,342
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Universal document consistency auditor. An agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace.

  • Works in 6 steps: Announce → Load the Authority Registry → Inventory Documentation Artifacts → …
  • Checking documentation accuracy before a release
  • SKILL.md covers Table of Contents, Overview, Truth Invariant and Examples, plus 9 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Validate Consistency is an agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace. Universal document consistency auditor. Runs deterministic drift checks across docs, code, tests, and CI, resolves conflicts through a per-fact-class authority registry (sot-map.yaml), and produces reports that structurally separate deterministic findings from advisory LLM-judged findings. Use when checking documentation accuracy before a release, after major refactors, or when onboarding to a new codebase. Also invoked automatically by /release Phase 1.6. Trigger with "/validate-consistency", "check…

Its SKILL.md is about 5.7k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. The skill folder holds 3 other files, including reference files (for example `references/drift-categories.md` and `references/sot-registry.md`). Compatibility notes: Designed for Claude Code

It sits in Development, covering Refactoring. The repository describes itself as: Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Checking documentation accuracy before a release
  • After major refactors
  • Onboarding to a new codebase
  • With /validate-consistency

Example prompts

  • “/validate-consistency”
  • “check consistency”
  • “validate docs”
  • “/validate-consistency”

Requirements

  • Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Designed for Claude Code
  • Pre-approved tools (allowed-tools): Read, Glob, Grep, Bash(echo:*), Bash(git:*), Bash(diff:*)

Workflow steps

6 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Announce
  2. Load the Authority Registry
  3. Inventory Documentation Artifacts
  4. Run Drift Checks
  5. Compile Report
  6. Summary

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit cfae287. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves these tools, so the agent can use them without asking each time:

    • Read
    • Glob
    • Grep
    • Bash(echo:*)
    • Bash(git:*)
    • Bash(diff:*)

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are yaml, bash and markdown).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

  • Compatibility

    Designed for Claude Code

    From compatibility in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

Context cost

Validate Consistency loads about 5.7k tokens when it runs, and up to ~8.7k if it reads all its reference files. Until then it costs about 150 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,285 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~150
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.7k
With references · SKILL.md plus every file in references/, read only if the agent opens them
~8.7k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace at commit cfae287, republished under its MIT licence (© jeremylongshore). 2,285 words, ~5,696 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/validate-consistency/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder). This skill also uses 2 other files; get the full folder from GitHub.
name
validate-consistency
description
Universal document consistency auditor. Runs deterministic drift checks across docs, code, tests, and CI, resolves conflicts through a per-fact-class authority registry (sot-map.yaml), and produces reports that structurally separate deterministic findings from advisory LLM-judged findings. Use when checking documentation accuracy before a release, after major refactors, or when onboarding to a new codebase. Also invoked automatically by /release Phase 1.6. Trigger with "/validate-consistency", "check consistency", "validate docs", "audit documentation", "doc drift check".
allowed-tools
Read, Glob, Grep, Bash(echo:*), Bash(git:*), Bash(diff:*)
compatibility
Designed for Claude Code
argument-hint
[optional path to sot-map.yaml — defaults to ~/000-projects/intent-os/sot-map.yaml]
version
3.29.0
author
Jeremy Longshore <jeremy@intentsolutions.io>
license
MIT
tags
documentation, consistency, audit, drift-detection, quality

Universal Document Consistency Auditor v3.0

Table of Contents

  1. Overview
  2. Truth Invariant
  3. Examples
  4. Instructions — Steps 0–5
  5. Severity Assignment Rules
  6. Bootstrap: Drafting Registry Rows
  7. Integration with /release
  8. Output
  9. Error Handling
  10. Resources

Overview

Runs deterministic drift checks across all documentation artifacts, resolves conflicts through a per-fact-class authority registry (sot-map.yaml), and produces a structured report with actionable findings grouped by category and severity. Deterministic checks and LLM-judged checks are structurally separated: judged findings are advisory-only and never block anything.

Truth Invariant

The governed brain arbitrates asserted company/doctrine claims and the rules of arbitration — never generated facts. This validator never reads the brain as ground truth for generated facts: authority for a generated fact lives only in a registry row a human has adjudicated. The brain ingests only human-adjudicated findings — raw findings from this skill are candidate evidence, not truth, until a human adjudicates them.

Examples

Basic audit:

/validate-consistency

Runs the full audit on the current working directory. Loads the authority registry and produces a categorized report.

Targeted check after refactor:

I just renamed a bunch of modules — check consistency

Detects that code changed, runs all 9 checks, surfaces broken cross-references (deterministic) and stale capability claims (advisory).

Pre-release gate (via /release):

/release

Phase 1.6 automatically invokes this skill. Deterministic Critical findings block the release; advisory findings are surfaced for review and never block.

Prerequisites

  • Must be run from inside a git repository (or directory with recognizable project structure)
  • Read access to all project files
  • An authority registry (sot-map.yaml) — optional; without one the skill runs in bootstrap mode (see Step 1)

Instructions

Step 0: Announce
echo "════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════"
echo "  DOCUMENT CONSISTENCY AUDIT"
echo "════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════"
Step 1: Load the Authority Registry

The source of truth is a per-fact-class authority registry declared as data — never a global ranking, never auto-detected at runtime.

  1. Resolve the registry path: the path supplied by the invoker (argument or explicit instruction) if given; otherwise the default ~/000-projects/intent-os/sot-map.yaml.
  2. Read and parse the registry. Print what was loaded:
echo "Authority registry: [path]"
echo "Fact classes registered: [n] — [list of class names]"
  1. If the registry is missing or unparseable, announce bootstrap mode: every fact class is unowned. Conflicts are still detected and reported, but no winner is ever named — each is emitted as unowned fact-class — human adjudication needed, and the report includes drafted registry rows for a human to adjudicate (see Bootstrap).

Registry row shape:

yaml
version: 1
fact_classes:
  version:                              # key = fact_class (snake_case / dotted)
    owner: package-manifest             # required — the ONE producing surface
    mirrors:                            # surfaces expected to restate the fact;
      - readme                          #   each diffed against the owner only
      - changelog                       #   (star topology — never pairwise N×N)
    determinism: deterministic          # deterministic | llm-judged
    depth_tier: T1                      # T1 value-equality | T2 judged/semantic
    staleness_bound: 0                  # days a mirror may lag before lag = drift
    criticality: high                   # critical | high | medium (severity ceiling)
    volatile: false                     # true = mirrors expected to trail (Info-level
                                        #   replication lag inside the bound)
    adjudicated_by: jeremy              # optional provenance — who made the call
    adjudicated_on: YYYY-MM-DD          # optional provenance — when
  license:
    owner: license-file
    mirrors: [readme]
    determinism: deterministic
    depth_tier: T1
    staleness_bound: 0
    criticality: high
    volatile: false

Resolution rule: when two artifacts disagree on a fact of class F — if the registry has a row for F, the artifact belonging to that row's owner class is correct and the finding is filed against the other artifact. If the registry has no row for F, emit the finding as unowned fact-class — human adjudication needed: list both values and locations, name no winner, never guess.

Reference: See references/sot-registry.md for the full registry specification, fact-class and artifact-class vocabularies, and the bootstrap appendix.

Step 2: Inventory Documentation Artifacts

Scan for all documentation artifacts that will be audited:

bash
# Find all documentation files
echo "Scanning for documentation artifacts..."

Use Glob to find:

  • README.md, README.*
  • CLAUDE.md
  • CHANGELOG.md, CHANGES.md
  • 000-docs/**/*.md
  • docs/**/*.md
  • planning/**/*.md
  • VERSION, version.txt
  • .github/workflows/*.yml, .github/workflows/*.yaml
  • Package manifests: package.json, Gemfile, *.gemspec, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod

Print a summary of what was found:

echo "Documentation artifacts found:"
echo "  - README: [yes/no]"
echo "  - CLAUDE.md: [yes/no]"
echo "  - CHANGELOG: [yes/no]"
echo "  - Canonical docs (000-docs/): [count] files"
echo "  - Other docs (docs/): [count] files"
echo "  - Planning docs: [count] files"
echo "  - CI workflows: [count] files"
echo "  - Package manifests: [list]"
Step 3: Run Drift Checks

Execute ALL applicable checks from the list below. Each check is independent — run every check that has the required files present. Skip checks whose input files don't exist (note the skip, don't error).

Every check carries a Lane tag:

  • Deterministic — existence, string-equality, and exact-comparison checks. Findings may be Critical, Warning, or Info.
  • LLM-judged (advisory) — checks requiring semantic judgment. Findings are ⚪ Advisory, always — never Critical, never blocking.

Reference: See references/drift-categories.md for category definitions and severity guide.

Check 3.1: Index vs Filesystem (Category 7 — Index/Reference Drift)

Lane: Deterministic (referential integrity — no registry row needed; the filesystem is the definitional referent).

If 000-docs/000-INDEX.md exists:

  1. Read the index file
  2. Extract all file paths listed in the index
  3. For each path, verify the file exists on disk using Glob
  4. Scan the 000-docs/ directory for files NOT listed in the index
  5. Report: missing files (listed but don't exist), unlisted files (exist but not indexed)
Check 3.2: Version String Consistency (Category 1 — Status Drift)

Lane: Deterministic. Fact class: version-string.

Collect version strings from ALL available sources:

  • VERSION or version.txt file
  • package.json → version field
  • *.gemspec → version attribute
  • pyproject.toml → [project] version or [tool.poetry] version
  • Cargo.toml → [package] version
  • CHANGELOG.md → first version header (e.g., ## [1.2.3] or ## 1.2.3)
  • README.md → version badges, install commands with version numbers
  • CLAUDE.md → any version references

Compare all found version strings. If they disagree, resolve via the version-string registry row and flag all deviations from the registered authority. No row → emit unowned fact-class — human adjudication needed with every value and location; name no winner.

Check 3.3: README Commands vs CI Workflows (Category 4 — CI/Validation Drift)

Lane: Deterministic. Fact class: ci-commands.

If both README and .github/workflows/ exist:

  1. Extract shell commands from README code blocks (look for bash, shell, sh fenced blocks and inline backtick commands in "Getting Started", "Development", "Testing", "Usage" sections)
  2. Extract run: step commands from all workflow YAML files
  3. Compare test commands, build commands, lint commands (exact string comparison)
  4. Flag differences, resolving via the ci-commands registry row; no row → unowned fact-class callout
Check 3.4: CLAUDE.md Doc Table vs Actual Docs (Category 7 — Index/Reference Drift)

Lane: Deterministic (referential integrity — no registry row needed).

If CLAUDE.md references specific files or directories:

  1. Extract all file/directory paths mentioned in CLAUDE.md
  2. Verify each path exists
  3. Flag references to non-existent files or directories
Check 3.5: Stale Phase/Status Language (Category 1 — Status Drift)

Lane: LLM-judged (advisory). Fact class: phase-status.

Search all documentation for phrases that may indicate stale status:

  • "no application code" / "no code exists" / "scaffold only" / "placeholder" — flag if lib/, src/, or app/ contains actual source files
  • "pre-release" / "not yet released" — flag if git tags show version releases
  • "planned" / "upcoming" / "future" — flag if the described feature exists in code
  • Phase references (e.g., "Phase: Scaffolding") — cross-reference against actual project maturity

Use Grep to search for these phrases, then validate against the filesystem. The grep is deterministic; deciding whether the language is actually stale is semantic judgment, so every finding here is ⚪ Advisory.

Check 3.6: Capability Claims vs Code (Category 3 — Capability/Behavior Drift)

Lane: LLM-judged (advisory). Fact class: capability-claims.

If README has a features section (look for ## Features, ## Capabilities, ## What it does, bullet lists under these headers):

  1. Extract each claimed feature/capability
  2. For each claim, search the codebase for corresponding implementation
  3. Flag overclaims (feature listed but no code found)
  4. Also: scan for significant code modules/classes that have NO documentation mention (underdocumented features)

Mapping a prose claim to an implementation is semantic judgment — every finding here is ⚪ Advisory.

Check 3.7: Cross-Doc Fact Comparison (Category 6 — Cross-Doc Contradiction)

Lane: Deterministic for exact-value facts; LLM-judged (advisory) for the description comparison.

Extract and compare key facts across documents:

  • License (fact class license): README license mention vs LICENSE file vs package manifest license field — deterministic
  • Language/runtime version (fact class runtime-version): README vs package manifest vs CI workflow matrix — deterministic
  • Repository URL (fact class repository-url): README badges/links vs package manifest repository field vs git remote — deterministic
  • Description (fact class project-description): README first paragraph vs package manifest description vs CLAUDE.md purpose — semantic equivalence is a judgment call, so report in the advisory lane

Flag any contradictions. Resolve each via its fact-class registry row; no row → unowned fact-class callout.

Check 3.8: Broken Cross-References (Category 7 — Index/Reference Drift)

Lane: Deterministic (referential integrity — no registry row needed).

Scan all markdown files for internal links and references:

  1. Find all [text](path) links where path is a relative file path (not URL)
  2. Find all explicit file path references in prose (e.g., "see docs/setup.md")
  3. Verify each referenced file exists
  4. Flag broken references with source file, line number, and dead target
Check 3.9: Planning-vs-Implementation State (Category 5 — Planning-vs-Implementation Confusion)

Lane: LLM-judged (advisory). Fact class: planning-status.

If planning/ directory exists:

  1. Read planning documents for listed epics, features, milestones
  2. Check which planned items have corresponding code implementations
  3. Flag: planning says "future" but code exists (stale planning)
  4. Flag: docs present planning items as if implemented (overclaim)

Judging whether code "implements" a planned item is semantic — every finding here is ⚪ Advisory.

Show full SKILL.md (943 more words)Show less
Step 4: Compile Report

Produce the report in this exact structure. Deterministic and advisory findings are structurally separated — never mixed in one section.

markdown
# Document Consistency Audit Report

**Project:** [repo name or directory name]
**Date:** [current date]
**Registry:** [path + fact classes covered | "not found — bootstrap mode, all fact classes unowned"]

## Executive Summary

| Severity | Count |
|----------|-------|
| 🔴 Critical (deterministic only) | [n] |
| 🟡 Warning (deterministic only) | [n] |
| 🔵 Info (deterministic only) | [n] |
| ⚪ Advisory (LLM-judged) | [n] |
| **Total** | **[n]** |

## Part A — Deterministic Findings

### Category 1: Status Drift
[Findings or "No issues found."]
### Category 4: CI/Validation Drift
[Findings or "No issues found."]
### Category 6: Cross-Doc Contradiction
[Findings or "No issues found."]
### Category 7: Index/Reference Drift
[Findings or "No issues found."]

## Part B — Advisory Findings (LLM-judged, never blocking)

### Category 1: Status Drift (phase/status language)
### Category 3: Capability/Behavior Drift
### Category 5: Planning-vs-Implementation Confusion
### Category 6: Cross-Doc Contradiction (description)
[Findings or "No issues found." per section]

## Unowned Fact Classes — Human Adjudication Needed

[One entry per conflict whose fact class has no registry row: fact class, all values, all locations. No winner named.]

## Proposed Registry Rows (bootstrap draft — requires human adjudication)

[Only when unowned fact classes were encountered: a fenced YAML block of drafted rows per the Bootstrap section. The skill never writes sot-map.yaml itself.]

## Priority Actions

[Numbered list of the most impactful fixes, ordered by severity then effort. Deterministic findings first; advisory items listed last and labeled advisory.]

Each finding MUST include:

  • Severity: 🔴 Critical / 🟡 Warning / 🔵 Info (deterministic) or ⚪ Advisory (LLM-judged)
  • Fact class: the registry row cited, or unowned
  • What the authority says: [value from the registered-authority artifact — omit for unowned; list values symmetrically instead]
  • What the drifted artifact says: [the drifted claim]
  • Location: file_path:line_number for both artifacts
  • Auto-fixable: Yes / No (could a simple text replacement fix this? reported only — this skill never applies fixes)
Step 5: Summary

Print a one-line summary after the report:

echo ""
echo "Audit complete: [n] critical, [n] warning, [n] info, [n] advisory findings across [n] artifacts."

If there are deterministic critical findings, add:

echo "⚠️  Critical issues should be resolved before release."

Severity Assignment Rules

Apply these rules consistently. Hard rule: LLM-judged findings are ⚪ Advisory, always — never Critical, never Warning, never blocking. No exceptions.

ConditionLaneSeverity
Version mismatch, fact class registeredDeterministic🔴 Critical
Any conflict on an unowned fact classDeterministic🟡 Warning + unowned callout
README test command doesn't match CIDeterministic🟡 Warning
Index file missing entries for existing docsDeterministic🟡 Warning
Cross-doc disagreement on exact-value factDeterministic🟡 Warning
Broken internal link/referenceDeterministic🟡 Warning
Extra index entries referencing deleted filesDeterministic🔵 Info
Feature claimed in README but absent from codeLLM-judged⚪ Advisory
"scaffold only" language in repo with codeLLM-judged⚪ Advisory
Planning doc describes implemented feature as futureLLM-judged⚪ Advisory
Description drift between README/manifest/CLAUDE.mdLLM-judged⚪ Advisory
Underdocumented feature (exists in code, not in docs)LLM-judged⚪ Advisory

Bootstrap: Drafting Registry Rows

Project-type auto-detection survives only here — it is a bootstrap heuristic for drafting registry rows, never runtime authority for resolving a conflict.

When the registry is missing or a fact class is unowned, draft proposed rows for the human to adjudicate:

1. Detect project type by scanning the working directory for file markers.

Check for engineering markers:

  • Directories: lib/, src/, app/, spec/, test/, tests/
  • Files: Gemfile, package.json, go.mod, Cargo.toml, pyproject.toml, *.gemspec, Makefile, CMakeLists.txt, pom.xml, build.gradle

Check for marketing/content markers:

  • Files: index.html (at root), wp-content/, themes/
  • Absence of lib/, src/, app/

Decision:

  • Engineering markers found, no marketing-only markers → Engineering repo
  • Marketing markers found, no engineering markers → Marketing/content site
  • Both found → Hybrid
  • Neither found → Unknown — draft conservatively as engineering repo

Detection is additive — check for ANY marker in each category. A single match is sufficient.

2. Draft rows mapping each unowned fact class encountered to an authority artifact class, using the legacy hierarchy in references/sot-registry.md (appendix) as the drafting heuristic.

3. Emit the drafted rows in the report's "Proposed Registry Rows" section as a fenced YAML block, explicitly marked bootstrap draft — requires human adjudication. The skill never writes sot-map.yaml — a human reviews, edits, and commits the rows.

Integration with /release

This skill is called by /release during Phase 1.6 (Cross-Artifact Consistency Validation). Only Part A deterministic findings feed the release blocking gate: deterministic 🔴 Critical findings block the release. Part B advisory findings and unowned fact-class callouts are surfaced for human review and never block. When invoked from /release, the report is incorporated into the release audit trail rather than printed standalone.

Output

The skill produces a structured markdown report containing:

  1. Executive summary — finding counts by severity (Critical/Warning/Info/Advisory)
  2. Registry header — which registry was loaded and which fact classes it covers (or bootstrap mode)
  3. Part A — deterministic findings by drift category
  4. Part B — advisory (LLM-judged) findings by drift category, structurally separate
  5. Unowned fact classes — conflicts needing human adjudication, no winner named
  6. Proposed registry rows — bootstrap drafts for human review, when applicable
  7. Priority actions — ordered list of the most impactful fixes

Each individual finding includes: severity icon, lane, fact class, what the authority artifact says (when registered), what the drifted artifact says, file paths with line numbers, and whether the fix is auto-applicable.

When invoked standalone, the report is printed to the conversation. When invoked from /release, the report is incorporated into the release audit trail.

Error Handling

ConditionBehavior
Registry (sot-map.yaml) not foundBootstrap mode: all fact classes unowned; conflicts reported with no winner named; drafted rows emitted
Registry unparseableTreat as not found; report the parse error verbatim in the report header
Conflict on a fact class with no registry rowEmit unowned fact-class — human adjudication needed; never guess
No README or CLAUDE.md foundSkip checks that require those files; note in report
No CI workflows foundSkip CI drift checks (3.3); note "No CI workflows found — CI checks skipped"
No 000-docs/ directorySkip index checks (3.1); note in report
No planning directorySkip planning-vs-implementation check (3.9); note in report
No package manifest foundSkip version consistency check for that source; use whatever version sources exist
Empty repository (no files)Report "No documentation artifacts found — nothing to audit" and exit
Binary files in doc pathsSkip binary files; only audit text/markdown files

The skill never fails — it gracefully skips checks whose inputs don't exist and reports what it could verify.

What This Skill Does NOT Do

  • Does not auto-fix anything — it reports. Fixes are a separate step. It never writes sot-map.yaml either — drafted rows are for human review.
  • Does not guess authority — a conflict on an unowned fact class is reported for human adjudication, never resolved by ranking or inference.
  • Does not read the governed brain as ground truth for generated facts (see Truth Invariant).
  • Does not audit email or CRM content — out of scope for v1.
  • Does not use WebSearch or WebFetch — filesystem and git only. Does not validate external URLs (no HTTP requests).
  • Does not run tests or execute code.
  • Does not check grammar or writing quality.
  • Does not assess documentation completeness (only consistency).

Resources

  • Drift category definitions and severity guide: references/drift-categories.md
  • Registry specification, fact-class and artifact-class vocabularies, resolution rule, and the legacy-hierarchy bootstrap appendix: references/sot-registry.md
  • Default registry location: ~/000-projects/intent-os/sot-map.yaml (path configurable per invocation)

© jeremylongshore, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

SKILL.md and 2 other files (references) in skills/.curated/validate-consistency of jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace.

  • SKILL.md
  • references/drift-categories.md
  • references/sot-registry.md

Open the folder on GitHubat commit cfae287

Compare with similar skills

Validate Consistency next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Validate Consistency compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Validate Consistency this skilljeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace2.8k—~5.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Guidelinesakash-network/node1.1k20 repos~577Automated safety check: PassMIT
Migrate Core Code to Submodulestinyhumansai/openhuman42k—~2.6kAutomated safety check: PassGPL-3.0
Component Refactoringlangflow-ai/langflow155k—~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Ponytail Lazy Developer ModeDietrichGebert/ponytail160k1 repos~873Automated safety check: PassMIT
ast-grep Structural Searchcode-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent70k—~3.3kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Guidelines

    akash-network/node

    Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. An agent skill from akash-network/node.

    1.1k GitHub starsUsed in 20 repos~577 tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Migrate Core Code to Submodules

    tinyhumansai/openhuman

    Plans and carries out moving non-host-specific code and its tests from the OpenHuman core into vendored tiny submodule libraries, then releases the submodule and re-pins the host.

    42k GitHub stars~2.6k tokensUpdated today
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Component Refactoring

    langflow-ai/langflow

    Refactor high-complexity React components in Langflow frontend.

    155k GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated yesterday
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Ponytail Lazy Developer Mode

    DietrichGebert/ponytail

    Makes the agent pick the laziest solution that works: skip unneeded work, reuse what exists, prefer the standard library and platform features, and keep diffs small.

    160k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~873 tokens
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • ast-grep Structural Search

    code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent

    Searches and rewrites code by syntax-tree shape across 25 languages with ast-grep, for codemods, structural queries and YAML lint rules, using a Python wrapper script.

    70k GitHub stars~3.3k tokensUpdated today
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed
  • Systematic Code Refactoring

    luongnv89/claude-howto

    Guides refactoring in phases based on Martin Fowler's method: research, test coverage check, planning and small tested steps, with your approval at each phase.

    42k GitHub stars~3k tokensUpdated today
    DevelopmentAuto-check passed

More from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

All 3,342 skills in this repo
  • Performing Security Code Review

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Execute this skill enables AI assistant to conduct a security-focused code review using the security-agent plugin.

    2.8k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~1.3k tokens
    Auto-check: notes
  • Adapting Transfer Learning Models

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Build this skill automates the adaptation of pre-trained machine learning models using transfer learning techniques.

    2.8k GitHub stars~1.1k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Agent Context Loader

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Execute proactive auto-loading: automatically detects and loads agents.md files.

    2.8k GitHub stars~1.1k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Aggregating Performance Metrics

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Aggregate and centralize performance metrics from applications, systems, databases, caches, and services.

    2.8k GitHub stars~1.2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Analyzing Capacity Planning

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Execute this skill enables AI assistant to analyze capacity requirements and plan for future growth.

    2.8k GitHub stars~947 tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Analyzing Database Indexes

    jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace

    Process use when you need to work with database indexing. An agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace.

    2.8k GitHub stars~2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Categories

Questions about Validate Consistency

What does Validate Consistency do?

Universal document consistency auditor. An agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace. Validate Consistency is an agent skill from jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace. Universal document consistency auditor.

When should I use Validate Consistency?

Validate Consistency fits situations like: checking documentation accuracy before a release; after major refactors; onboarding to a new codebase; with /validate-consistency.

How do I install Validate Consistency in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace --skill validate-consistency -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/.curated/validate-consistency in jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace) into .claude/skills/validate-consistency in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Validate Consistency in Codex?

Run `npx skills add jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace --skill validate-consistency -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/.curated/validate-consistency in jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace) into .agents/skills/validate-consistency in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Validate Consistency in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace --skill validate-consistency -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/validate-consistency, .gemini/skills/validate-consistency, .github/skills/validate-consistency and .opencode/skills/validate-consistency in your project.

What does Validate Consistency need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Validate Consistency is instructions for the agent only. Its frontmatter pre-approves these tools: Read, Glob, Grep, Bash(echo:*), Bash(git:*), Bash(diff:*). Compatibility (from SKILL.md): Designed for Claude Code.

Does Validate Consistency access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Validate Consistency safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Validate Consistency use?

Validate Consistency is published under the MIT licence (declared in SKILL.md). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Validate Consistency use?

About 5.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 23k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full. Its references folder adds about 3k tokens, read only when the agent opens those files.

What are the alternatives to Validate Consistency?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Validate Consistency: Guidelines (akash-network/node, 1.1k stars), Migrate Core Code to Submodules (tinyhumansai/openhuman, 42k stars), Component Refactoring (langflow-ai/langflow, 155k stars) and Ponytail Lazy Developer Mode (DietrichGebert/ponytail, 160k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Validate Consistency?

jeremylongshore (a GitHub user) maintains it in jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace, which has 2,827 GitHub stars. The repository holds 3,342 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 10, 2026.

Source: jeremylongshore/tons-of-skills-marketplace on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.