name: audit-agent description: >- Structured document audit engine with a 6-stage LLM-powered pipeline (coherence check, claim extraction, assumption surfacing, stakeholder analysis, methodology review, bias detection), quantitative weighted scoring with pass/fail thresholds, severity distribution analysis, traffic-light visual dashboard, and multi-format reports (text, HTML, JSON). version: 1.0.0 tags: - audit - document-analysis - critical-thinking - bias-detection - methodology - quality-assurance trigger_phrases: - "audit this document" - "audit this paper" - "review document quality" - "check for bias" - "extract claims" - "identify assumptions" - "stakeholder analysis" - "methodology review" - "文件審計" - "審查文件"
AuditAgent performs a structured 6-stage audit of any text document. Each stage is an independent LLM-powered module that examines the document from a different angle. The stages run sequentially with context flowing from one to the next. A quantitative scorer aggregates findings into a weighted composite score (0-100) with pass/fail determination, severity distribution, red flag summaries, and traffic-light visualization. Reports are produced in structured text, self-contained HTML, and machine-readable JSON formats.
What this tool does: - Run a 6-stage audit pipeline on any document:
| # | Stage | Weight | What It Does |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coherence Check | 0.20 | Detects internal contradictions, inconsistencies, and logical gaps. |
| 2 | Claim Extraction | 0.15 | Identifies factual claims, assertions, and their supporting evidence. |
| 3 | Assumption Surfacing | 0.15 | Surfaces unstated assumptions, implicit premises, and hidden axioms. |
| 4 | Stakeholder Analysis | 0.15 | Identifies affected parties, their interests, and power dynamics. |
| 5 | Methodology Review | 0.20 | Evaluates methods, data quality, research design, and analytical rigor. |
| 6 | Bias Detection | 0.15 | Detects framing bias, selection bias, confirmation bias, and loaded language. |
這個技能的最新版本可以在7w4.net小蔥技能站找到。
AuditScorer configuration.What this tool does NOT do: - It does NOT audit code, financial statements, or legal contracts with domain-specific rules. - It does NOT guarantee factual correctness of findings -- LLM output is probabilistic. - It does NOT modify or annotate the original document. - It does NOT run in real-time -- it is a batch pipeline.
Use this skill when the user: - Provides a document (text, article, report, paper) and asks for an audit, review, or quality assessment. - Wants to identify logical inconsistencies, unstated assumptions, or biases in a text. - Needs stakeholder analysis or methodology evaluation for a policy document or research paper. - Asks to "audit this document", "review document quality", "check for bias", "extract claims", "identify assumptions", "文件審計", or "審查文件".
from audit_agent import AuditAgent
agent = AuditAgent(model="local") # or model="qwen2.5:7b"
result = agent.audit("path/to/document.txt")
# Check results
print(result.executive_summary())
# Export reports
result.export_html("output/report.html")
result.export_json("output/report.json")
result.export_text("output/report.txt")
The 6-stage pipeline is defined in audit_agent/stages.py and audit_agent/prompts.py. Each stage has:
- A unique stage_name mapping to its prompt template.
- An __init__ that accepts an LLM client.
- A run(document, prior_stage_output, model_name) method that executes the stage.
from audit_agent.scoring import AuditScorer
scorer = AuditScorer(
weights={
"coherence_check": 0.20,
"claim_extraction": 0.15,
"assumption_surfacing": 0.15,
"stakeholder_analysis": 0.15,
"methodology_review": 0.20,
"bias_detection": 0.15,
},
pass_threshold=70.0,
)
=======================================================================
AuditAgent -- 結構化文件審計報告
=======================================================================
文件: My Document
審計時間: 2026-07-06T10:00:00
綜合評分: 68.5/100
審計結果: 未通過 (FAIL)
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
各階段評分
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
🟡 一致性檢查 (coherence_check): 72/100 (加權貢獻: 14.4)
🟢 主張提取 (claim_extraction): 85/100 (加權貢獻: 12.8)
🔴 隱含假設揭示 (assumption_surfacing): 45/100 (加權貢獻: 6.8)
...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
問題嚴重度分佈
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
嚴重 (Critical): 3 | 高危 (High): 7 | 中等 (Medium): 12 | 低危 (Low): 5 | 資訊 (Info): 2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
一致性檢查 — 檢測文件內部邏輯矛盾與不一致性
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[CRITICAL] COH-001 (severity=90)
Section 2 claims X while Section 5 implies not-X.
位置: Paragraphs 12-15
原文: "The policy achieved its stated goals..."
建議: Clarify the contradiction between Section 2 and Section 5.
...
=======================================================================
審計結束
=======================================================================
Q: What model should I use? A: Default is Qwen2.5:7b via Ollama. Any OpenAI-compatible model works. Larger models may produce better quality audits, especially for complex documents.
Q: Can I audit documents in any language? A: Yes. The stage prompts are in Chinese and the system prompt instructs the LLM to work with the document's language. Multi-language documents are supported.
Q: What does a "pass" mean? A: A composite score of 70 or above (configurable) indicates the document passed the audit. This is a relative quality metric, not an absolute guarantee.
Q: How long does an audit take? A: Each of the 6 stages makes an LLM call. With a local Ollama model, expect 30-120 seconds total depending on document length and hardware.
Q: Can I skip certain stages? A: The pipeline expects all 6 stages. To skip a stage, you would need to modify the scoring weights to zero out unwanted stages and adjust the orchestrator.
這個 Skill 質量很好,定位清晰——專門用於審計文件質量而非通用聊天。6個審計維度覆蓋全面,從邏輯一致性到偏見檢測都有涉及。評分系統直觀,能給出具體分數和紅牌警告。多語言支援和多格式報告輸出是加分項。主要缺點是缺少測試用例,普通使用者難以驗證輸出準確性;另外對提示詞質量的依賴較高,不同模型可能產生不一致結果。整體適合需要嚴肅評估文件質量的使用者使用。