Ponytail audit
Skill hsnuhow/how-skills/plugins/ponytail/skills/ponytail-audit
個人 Claude Code plugin marketplace：skill 管理指令（skill-list/status/RCM）＋ commands-only 的 ponytail。
npx -y skills add hsnuhow/how-skills --skill ponytail-auditAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
3 things to look at
- 21 days oldThe repository was created 21 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Whole-repo audit for over-engineering. Like ponytail-review, but scans the entire codebase instead of a diff: a ranked list of what to delete, simplify, or replace with stdlib/native equivalents. Use when the user says "audit this codebase", "audit for over-engineering", "what can I delete from this repo", "find bloat", "ponytail-audit", or "/ponytail-audit". One-shot report, does not apply fixes.
SKILL.md
1.6 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
ponytail-review, repo-wide. Scan the whole tree instead of a diff. Rank findings biggest cut first.
Tags
Same as ponytail-review:
delete:dead code, unused flexibility, speculative feature. Replacement: nothing.stdlib:hand-rolled thing the standard library ships. Name the function.native:dependency or code doing what the platform already does. Name the feature.yagni:abstraction with one implementation, config nobody sets, layer with one caller.shrink:same logic, fewer lines. Show the shorter form.
Hunt
Deps the stdlib or platform already ships, single-implementation interfaces, factories with one product, wrappers that only delegate, files exporting one thing, dead flags and config, hand-rolled stdlib.
Output
One line per finding, ranked: <tag> <what to cut>. <replacement>. [path].
End with net: -<N> lines, -<M> deps possible. Nothing to cut: Lean already. Ship.
Boundaries
Scope: over-engineering and complexity only. Correctness bugs, security holes, and performance are explicitly out of scope. Route them to a normal review pass. Lists findings, applies nothing. One-shot. "stop ponytail-audit" or "normal mode" to revert.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most audit compliance skills give
Counted across 936 of the 1,487 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- group findings by severityin 44 of 936
- Fetch latest guidelines before each reviewin 43 of 936, across 3 files
- Check files against all fetched rulesin 42 of 936, across 2 files
- Output findings in terse file:line formatin 41 of 936, across 3 files
- Ask user which files to review if none specifiedin 41 of 936, across 3 files
- Read specified files or prompt user for filesin 39 of 936, across 1 file
- generate the audit reportin 39 of 936, across 36 files
- assign a severity to every findingin 25 of 936
- run automated accessibility scansin 23 of 936, across 13 files
- map findings to WCAG criteriain 20 of 936, across 10 files
- confirm audit scopein 19 of 936, across 9 files
- check title tags and meta descriptions for uniquenessin 19 of 936, across 5 files
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once.