keep-current

You are auditing the Claude resource library documentation to ensure it accurately reflects the current state of the project.

Step 1 — Gather current state

Use the Bash tool to collect everything needed:

# Skills on disk
echo "=SKILLS_ON_DISK="
ls ~/dev/claude/skills/

# Recent git activity (last 20 commits)
echo "=RECENT_COMMITS="
git -C ~/dev/claude log --oneline -20

# Files changed in last 10 commits
echo "=RECENTLY_CHANGED="
git -C ~/dev/claude diff --name-only HEAD~10..HEAD 2>/dev/null

# Blog posts (most recent 5)
echo "=RECENT_POSTS="
ls -t ~/dev/www-andrewriley-info/content/post/2026/ 2>/dev/null | head -5

Then read the following files in parallel:

• ~/dev/claude/README.md
• ~/dev/claude/CLAUDE.md
• ~/dev/claude/PROFILE.md
• Each ~/dev/claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md for every skill found on disk

Step 2 — Audit README.md and CLAUDE.md

Check each of the following against the actual repo state:

Skills table audit

• Are all skills in skills/ listed in the README skills table and the CLAUDE.md skills quick reference?
• Are any skills listed in the docs but missing from disk?
• Are the descriptions accurate for each skill?

MCP server audit

• Do the MCP server sections reflect the actual registered servers and their configuration?
• Is the Claude Desktop section present and accurate?

Path conventions audit

• Do all documented paths still exist and match the repo structure?

General staleness

• Are there any sections that reference old approaches, removed features, or outdated commands?
• Does the repo structure diagram match skills/ and scripts/ on disk?

Step 3 — Audit PROFILE.md

Review the PROFILE.md against evidence of Andrew's actual communication style from:

• Blog post topics and tone (infer from recent post slugs and session context)
• Skills built (what problems he cares enough about to automate)
• Questions asked in this session (what he reaches for, how he frames problems)
• MCP integrations in use (Splunk, HuggingFace, GitHub, Slack, Gmail, Calendar — infer focus areas)

Look for gaps or updates worth making:

• Missing focus areas (e.g. Splunk/observability now prominent)
• Outdated role description or technical focus
• Communication style traits not yet captured
• Tools or workflows now central to his practice

Do NOT fabricate traits — only propose updates supported by observable evidence from the repo and session.

Step 4 — Present proposed changes

For each document, present a clear diff-style summary of what you propose to change and why:

---

README.md

Proposed changes:

• <what> — <why>

CLAUDE.md

Proposed changes:

• <what> — <why>

PROFILE.md

Proposed changes:

• <what> — <why>

No changes needed:

• <section> — already accurate

---

If nothing needs updating in a document, say so explicitly. Do not propose changes for the sake of it.

Step 5 — Confirm and apply

Use the AskUserQuestion tool to ask:

Here are the proposed updates across README.md, CLAUDE.md, and PROFILE.md. How would you like to proceed?

Options:

• Apply all — apply every proposed change
• Review each — walk through each change one at a time for approval
• Apply docs only (skip PROFILE.md) — apply README/CLAUDE changes, leave PROFILE untouched
• Cancel — make no changes

Step 6 — Apply approved changes

For each approved change, use the Edit tool to make the update precisely — no rewrites of surrounding content.

After all edits are applied, run:

cd ~/dev/claude
git add README.md CLAUDE.md PROFILE.md
git status

Show the user what is staged, then ask:

Changes staged. Commit and push to dev?

If confirmed:

cd ~/dev/claude && git commit -m "docs: keep-current audit — sync skills, MCP config, and profile updates" && git push

Tell the user what was updated and suggest running /repo-status to check overall sync state.