CLAUDE.md Auditor
Validates and scores CLAUDE.md files against three authoritative sources with actionable remediation guidance.
When to Use
- Audit before committing CLAUDE.md changes
- Onboard new projects and validate memory configuration
- Troubleshoot why Claude isn't following standards
- CI/CD integration for automated validation gates
Validation Sources
1. Official Anthropic Guidance
- Memory hierarchy (Enterprise > Project > User)
- "Keep them lean" requirement
- Import syntax and limitations (max 5 hops)
- What NOT to include (secrets, generic content)
- Authority: Highest (requirements from Anthropic)
2. Community Best Practices
- 100-300 line target range
- 80/20 rule (essential vs. supporting content)
- Organizational patterns and maintenance cadence
- Authority: Medium (recommended, not mandatory)
3. Research-Based Optimization
- "Lost in the middle" positioning (Liu et al., 2023)
- Token budget optimization
- Attention pattern considerations
- Authority: Medium (evidence-based)
Output Modes
Mode 1: Audit Report (Default)
Generate comprehensive markdown report:
Audit my CLAUDE.md file using the claude-md-auditor skill.
Output includes:
- Overall health score (0-100)
- Category scores (security, compliance, best practices)
- Findings grouped by severity (CRITICAL → LOW)
- Specific remediation steps with line numbers
Mode 2: JSON Report
Machine-readable format for CI/CD:
Generate JSON audit report for CI pipeline integration.
Use for: Automated quality gates, metrics tracking
Mode 3: Refactored File
Generate production-ready CLAUDE.md:
Audit my CLAUDE.md and generate a refactored version following best practices.
Output: CLAUDE_refactored.md with optimal structure and research-based positioning
Quick Examples
Security-Focused Audit
Run a security-focused audit on my CLAUDE.md to check for secrets.
Checks for: API keys, tokens, passwords, connection strings, private keys
Multi-Tier Audit
Audit CLAUDE.md files in my project hierarchy (Enterprise, Project, User tiers).
Checks each tier and reports conflicts between them.
Score Interpretation
Overall Health (0-100):
- 90-100: Excellent (minor optimizations only)
- 75-89: Good (some improvements recommended)
- 60-74: Fair (schedule improvements)
- 40-59: Poor (significant issues)
- 0-39: Critical (immediate action required)
Category Targets:
- Security: 100 (any issue is critical)
- Official Compliance: 80+
- Best Practices: 70+
Finding Severities
- CRITICAL: Security risk (fix immediately)
- HIGH: Compliance issue (fix this sprint)
- MEDIUM: Improvement opportunity (next quarter)
- LOW: Minor optimization (backlog)
Reference Documentation
Detailed validation criteria and integration examples:
reference/official-guidance.md- Complete Anthropic documentation compilationreference/best-practices.md- Community-derived recommendationsreference/research-insights.md- Academic research findingsreference/anti-patterns.md- Catalog of common mistakesreference/ci-cd-integration.md- Pre-commit, GitHub Actions, VS Code examples
Limitations
- Cannot automatically fix security issues (requires manual remediation)
- Cannot test if Claude actually follows the standards
- Cannot validate imported files beyond path existence
- Cannot detect circular imports
Success Criteria
A well-audited CLAUDE.md achieves:
- Security Score: 100/100
- Official Compliance: 80+/100
- Overall Health: 75+/100
- Zero CRITICAL findings
- < 3 HIGH findings
Version: 1.0.0 | Last Updated: 2025-10-26