ce-agent-native-audit

$27

First, invoke the agent-native-architecture skill to understand all principles:

/ce-agent-native-architecture

Select option 7 (action parity) to load the full reference material.

Step 2: Launch Parallel Sub-Agents

Launch 8 parallel sub-agents using the platform's subagent primitive (Agent with subagent_type: Explore in Claude Code, spawn_agent with agent_type: "explorer" in Codex, subagent with agent: "scout" in Pi via the pi-subagents extension), one for each principle. Each agent should:

• Enumerate ALL instances in the codebase (user actions, tools, contexts, data stores, etc.)

• Check compliance against the principle

• Provide a SPECIFIC SCORE like "X out of Y (percentage%)"

• List specific gaps and recommendations

Agent 1: Action Parity

Audit for ACTION PARITY - "Whatever the user can do, the agent can do."

Tasks:

1. Enumerate ALL user actions in frontend (API calls, button clicks, form submissions)

   - Search for API service files, fetch calls, form handlers

   - Check routes and components for user interactions

2. Check which have corresponding agent tools

   - Search for agent tool definitions

   - Map user actions to agent capabilities

3. Score: "Agent can do X out of Y user actions"

Format:

## Action Parity Audit

### User Actions Found

| Action | Location | Agent Tool | Status |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Missing Agent Tools

### Recommendations

Agent 2: Tools as Primitives

Audit for TOOLS AS PRIMITIVES - "Tools provide capability, not behavior."

Tasks:

1. Find and read ALL agent tool files

2. Classify each as:

   - PRIMITIVE (good): read, write, store, list - enables capability without business logic

   - WORKFLOW (bad): encodes business logic, makes decisions, orchestrates steps

3. Score: "X out of Y tools are proper primitives"

Format:

## Tools as Primitives Audit

### Tool Analysis

| Tool | File | Type | Reasoning |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Problematic Tools (workflows that should be primitives)

### Recommendations

Agent 3: Context Injection

Audit for CONTEXT INJECTION - "System prompt includes dynamic context about app state"

Tasks:

1. Find context injection code (search for "context", "system prompt", "inject")

2. Read agent prompts and system messages

3. Enumerate what IS injected vs what SHOULD be:

   - Available resources (files, drafts, documents)

   - User preferences/settings

   - Recent activity

   - Available capabilities listed

   - Session history

   - Workspace state

Format:

## Context Injection Audit

### Context Types Analysis

| Context Type | Injected? | Location | Notes |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Missing Context

### Recommendations

Agent 4: Shared Workspace

Audit for SHARED WORKSPACE - "Agent and user work in the same data space"

Tasks:

1. Identify all data stores/tables/models

2. Check if agents read/write to SAME tables or separate ones

3. Look for sandbox isolation anti-pattern (agent has separate data space)

Format:

## Shared Workspace Audit

### Data Store Analysis

| Data Store | User Access | Agent Access | Shared? |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Isolated Data (anti-pattern)

### Recommendations

Agent 5: CRUD Completeness

Audit for CRUD COMPLETENESS - "Every entity has full CRUD"

Tasks:

1. Identify all entities/models in the codebase

2. For each entity, check if agent tools exist for:

   - Create

   - Read

   - Update

   - Delete

3. Score per entity and overall

Format:

## CRUD Completeness Audit

### Entity CRUD Analysis

| Entity | Create | Read | Update | Delete | Score |

### Overall Score: X/Y entities with full CRUD (percentage%)

### Incomplete Entities (list missing operations)

### Recommendations

Agent 6: UI Integration

Audit for UI INTEGRATION - "Agent actions immediately reflected in UI"

Tasks:

1. Check how agent writes/changes propagate to frontend

2. Look for:

   - Streaming updates (SSE, WebSocket)

   - Polling mechanisms

   - Shared state/services

   - Event buses

   - File watching

3. Identify "silent actions" anti-pattern (agent changes state but UI doesn't update)

Format:

## UI Integration Audit

### Agent Action → UI Update Analysis

| Agent Action | UI Mechanism | Immediate? | Notes |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Silent Actions (anti-pattern)

### Recommendations

Agent 7: Capability Discovery

Audit for CAPABILITY DISCOVERY - "Users can discover what the agent can do"

Tasks:

1. Check for these 7 discovery mechanisms:

   - Onboarding flow showing agent capabilities

   - Help documentation

   - Capability hints in UI

   - Agent self-describes in responses

   - Suggested prompts/actions

   - Empty state guidance

   - Slash commands (/help, /tools)

2. Score against 7 mechanisms

Format:

## Capability Discovery Audit

### Discovery Mechanism Analysis

| Mechanism | Exists? | Location | Quality |

### Score: X/7 (percentage%)

### Missing Discovery

### Recommendations

Agent 8: Prompt-Native Features

Audit for PROMPT-NATIVE FEATURES - "Features are prompts defining outcomes, not code"

Tasks:

1. Read all agent prompts

2. Classify each feature/behavior as defined in:

   - PROMPT (good): outcomes defined in natural language

   - CODE (bad): business logic hardcoded

3. Check if behavior changes require prompt edit vs code change

Format:

## Prompt-Native Features Audit

### Feature Definition Analysis

| Feature | Defined In | Type | Notes |

### Score: X/Y (percentage%)

### Code-Defined Features (anti-pattern)

### Recommendations

Step 3: Compile Summary Report

After all agents complete, compile a summary with:

## Agent-Native Architecture Review: [Project Name]

### Overall Score Summary

| Core Principle | Score | Percentage | Status |

|----------------|-------|------------|--------|

| Action Parity | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| Tools as Primitives | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| Context Injection | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| Shared Workspace | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| CRUD Completeness | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| UI Integration | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| Capability Discovery | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

| Prompt-Native Features | X/Y | Z% | ✅/⚠️/❌ |

**Overall Agent-Native Score: X%**

### Status Legend

- ✅ Excellent (80%+)

- ⚠️ Partial (50-79%)

- ❌ Needs Work (<50%)

### Top 10 Recommendations by Impact

| Priority | Action | Principle | Effort |

|----------|--------|-----------|--------|

### What's Working Excellently

[List top 5 strengths]

Success Criteria

• All 8 sub-agents complete their audits

• Each principle has a specific numeric score (X/Y format)

• Summary table shows all scores and status indicators

• Top 10 recommendations are prioritized by impact

• Report identifies both strengths and gaps

Optional: Single Principle Audit

If $ARGUMENTS specifies a single principle (e.g., "action parity"), only run that sub-agent and provide detailed findings for that principle alone.

Valid arguments:

• action parity or 1

• tools or primitives or 2

• context or injection or 3

• shared or workspace or 4

• crud or 5

• ui or integration or 6

• discovery or 7

• prompt or features or 8