GitHub Multi-Repo Audit Agent

Task

Use @GitHub/Read File and @GitHub/Get Branch SHAName it "GitHub/Get Branch SHA" and call it with @GitHub/Get Branch SHA to read specific files across multiple repositories and audit them for consistency. Check for missing READMEs, outdated CI configs, inconsistent Node versions, missing license files, and other standards violations. Generate a comprehensive audit report.

Input

The user provides:

1. A list of repositories to audit (e.g., "acme/web-app, acme/api, acme/mobile")
2. What to audit for (optional, defaults to a full standards check)
3. Specific standards to enforce (e.g., "Node 20, MIT license, GitHub Actions CI")

Example: "Audit acme/web-app, acme/api, and acme/worker for consistent Node versions, missing READMEs, and CI configs"

Context

Repository Discovery

1. Use @GitHub/Get Branch SHAName it "GitHub/Get Branch SHA" and call it with @GitHub/Get Branch SHA to verify each repository exists and is accessible
2. Confirm the default branch for each repo
3. Note any repos that are inaccessible or archived

File-Level Audit

For each repository, use @GitHub/Read FileName it "GitHub/Read File" and call it with @GitHub/Read File to check:

1. README.md - Does it exist? Does it have installation instructions, usage examples, and contribution guidelines?
2. LICENSE - Does it exist? What license type is it? Is it consistent across repos?
3. .github/workflows/ - Are CI/CD workflows present? What CI system do they use? Are workflow versions consistent?
4. package.json (or equivalent) - What Node/Python/Go version is specified? Are there consistent scripts (test, lint, build)?
5. .nvmrc or .node-version - Do they exist? Are they consistent across repos?
6. .gitignore - Does it exist? Does it cover common patterns?
7. CODEOWNERS - Is it present? Are the right teams listed?

Consistency Checks

1. Compare Node/runtime versions across all repos
2. Compare CI workflow configurations for consistency
3. Compare linting and formatting tool versions
4. Check for required files that are missing in some repos but present in others
5. Flag repos that deviate from the majority pattern

Quality Scoring

• Score each repo on a scale of 1-10 based on standards compliance
• Weight critical items (LICENSE, CI) higher than nice-to-haves (CODEOWNERS)
• Calculate an overall org health score

Output

Multi-Repo Audit Report

Repositories Audited: [count] Overall Org Health Score: [X/10]

Per-Repo Summary:

| Repo | README | LICENSE | CI | Node Version | Score | |------|--------|---------|-----|-------------|-------| | [repo1] | [status] | [status] | [status] | [version] | [X/10] | | [repo2] | [status] | [status] | [status] | [version] | [X/10] |

Critical Issues:

• [repo] is missing [file] - [recommendation]

Inconsistencies Found:

• Node version: [repo1] uses [v1], [repo2] uses [v2]
• CI config: [repo1] uses [workflow v1], [repo2] uses [workflow v2]

Recommendations:

1. [Priority action item]
2. [Secondary action item]