/harness-audit - HQ Infrastructure Quality Score

Audit your HQ setup and score infrastructure quality across 7 categories: hook coverage, context efficiency, quality gates, session persistence, search infrastructure, security guardrails, and cost efficiency.

Arguments: Optional flags: --verbose (show all checks), --json (output JSON instead of text)

Scoring Overview

Total score: 70 points (10 points × 7 categories). Grade: A (63-70), B (56-62), C (49-55), D (42-48), F (0-41).

Category	Points	What it Checks
Hook Coverage	10	Derived from hq doctor --json (wiring + firing + fixture coverage)
Context Efficiency	10	CLAUDE.md conciseness + lazy loading
Quality Gates	10	typecheck/lint/test infrastructure
Session Persistence	10	thread files + checkpoint infrastructure
Search Coverage	10	qmd installation + collections freshness
Security Guardrails	10	company isolation + secret detection + policies
Cost Efficiency	10	token caps + subagent model + auto-compaction

---

Audit Process

Step 1: Hook Coverage Check (0-10)

This category delegates to hq doctor, the single source of truth for hook wiring and firing (US-012). It runs hq doctor --json and maps the result onto this 10-point score; the other six categories are unaffected.

What we check (via hq doctor --json):

• The doctor's results array reports per-hook wiring status across Claude, Codex, and Grok, plus the runtime probe (did hooks actually fire this session) and fixture coverage (which hooks are exercised vs merely wired).
• FAIL / UNKNOWN results mark broken or unverifiable wiring; UNTESTED marks a hook that is wired but has no fixture; WARN / NA / KNOWN-DEFECT are informational and never fail the command.

Implementation:

hq doctor --json 2>/dev/null

Then derive the 10-point score from the parsed document:

• Let fails = number of results[] whose status is FAIL or UNKNOWN.
• Let coverage = the fixture coverage ratio tested/total (from the hooks.fixtures.coverage result, or the UNTESTED vs total registered count).

Scoring (mapped onto 10 points):

• fails == 0 and coverage >= 0.8 = 10 points
• fails == 0 and coverage >= 0.5 = 8 points
• fails == 0 (any coverage) = 7 points
• fails 1-2 = 5 points
• fails 3-5 = 2 points
• fails > 5 = 0 points

Record the specific FAIL/UNKNOWN check ids and the coverage line as the category's details, and surface the doctor's remediation fields as the improvement suggestions for this category.

Graceful fallback (hq CLI absent or too old): if hq doctor --json is not available or does not emit a document with a results array, fall back to the legacy static check — read .claude/settings.json for the PreToolUse, PostToolUse, PreCompact, and Stop hook categories, list .claude/hooks/, and score: all core hooks present + 4 categories = 10; 6-7 = 7; 4-5 = 5; 1-3 = 2; 0 = 0. Note in the report that the score used the fallback path.

---

Step 2: Context Efficiency Check (0-10)

What we check:

• CLAUDE.md line count + lazy loading patterns (pointers to knowledge files vs inline content)
• Context diet compliance: no auto-loading of INDEX.md, agents files, company knowledge
• Evidence of knowledge extraction (reference files vs inline content)

Scoring:

• <300 lines + strong lazy loading + diet compliance = 10 points
• 300-400 lines + good lazy loading + diet compliance = 8 points
• 400-500 lines + minimal lazy loading or diet deviations = 5 points

• 500 lines or heavy inline content = 0 points

Implementation: wc -l .claude/CLAUDE.md, grep for pointer, reference to, load only patterns (evidence of lazy loading), check for inline content (tables, lists repeated from source docs).

---

Step 3: Quality Gates Check (0-10)

What we check:

• /quality-gate command exists
• /tdd command exists (or equivalent)
• Active repos have test/lint/typecheck scripts in package.json or equivalent

Scoring:

• All infrastructure present (skills + scripts in 2+ repos) = 10 points
• Both skills present = 8 points
• One skill present = 5 points
• No skills + no scripts = 0 points

Implementation: Check .claude/skills/quality-gate/SKILL.md, .claude/skills/tdd/SKILL.md, scan repos/ for package.json scripts.

---

Step 4: Session Persistence Check (0-10)

What we check:

• Thread files exist in workspace/threads/ (count > 50)
• Checkpoint files exist in workspace/checkpoints/
• /handoff and /checkpoint skills exist
• Auto-checkpoint hook is active in settings.json

Scoring:

• 50+ thread files + checkpoints + skills + hook active = 10 points
• 30-49 threads + checkpoints + skills = 8 points
• 10-29 threads + one or two skills = 5 points
• <10 threads or missing infrastructure = 0 points

Implementation: ls workspace/threads/ | wc -l, ls workspace/checkpoints/ | wc -l, check for .claude/skills/handoff/SKILL.md + .claude/skills/checkpoint/SKILL.md, grep settings.json for auto-checkpoint-trigger.

---

Step 5: Search Coverage Check (0-10)

What we check:

• qmd is installed
• Number of qmd collections (target: 8+)
• Index freshness (last update <7 days ago)
• Collections: hq-infra, hq-workers, hq-knowledge, hq-projects, {product}, {product}, {company}, personal minimum

Scoring:

• qmd installed + 8+ collections + index <7 days old = 10 points
• qmd installed + 5-7 collections + index <14 days old = 8 points
• qmd installed + 3-4 collections + index <30 days old = 5 points
• qmd not installed or 0-1 collections = 0 points

Implementation: which qmd, qmd collection list --json, parse updated timestamps.

---

Step 6: Security Guardrails Check (0-10)

What we check:

• warn-cross-company-settings.sh exists (company isolation)
• detect-secrets.sh exists (secret detection)
• core/policies/ directory exists with policies (company-isolation, credential-access-protocol, etc.)
• .gitignore covers .env*, credentials.json, tokens/, core/settings/
• companies/manifest.yaml exists

Scoring:

• All checks pass = 10 points
• 4 of 5 checks pass = 8 points
• 3 of 5 checks pass = 5 points
• 2 or fewer checks pass = 0 points

Implementation: Check file existence, read .gitignore, verify manifest.yaml structure.

---

Step 7: Cost Efficiency Check (0-10)

What we check:

• MAX_THINKING_TOKENS is set to "10000" (not higher)
• CLAUDE_CODE_SUBAGENT_MODEL is set to "haiku"
• CLAUDE_AUTOCOMPACT_PCT_OVERRIDE is set to "50"
• Model routing policy or documentation exists

Scoring:

• All 5 checks pass = 10 points
• 4 of 5 checks pass = 8 points
• 3 of 5 checks pass = 5 points
• 2 or fewer checks pass = 0 points

Implementation: Read .claude/settings.json, check env vars, verify command and policy files exist.

---

Reporting Results

After each category check, collect:

1. Category name
2. Score (0-10)
3. Pass/fail details (which sub-checks passed/failed)
4. File paths relevant to the category

At the end, output:

• Total score (70 max)
• Grade (A-F)
• Top 3 actionable improvements with specific file paths to fix

Example Output (Text Mode)

HQ INFRASTRUCTURE AUDIT REPORT
==============================

CATEGORY SCORES:
1. Hook Coverage:        8/10  ✓ (7/8 hooks present)
2. Context Efficiency:   9/10  ✓ (196 lines, good lazy loading)
3. Quality Gates:        9/10  ✓ (both commands, 5+ repos with scripts)
4. Session Persistence: 10/10  ✓ (185 threads, 42 checkpoints, all commands)
5. Search Coverage:      10/10  ✓ (qmd installed, 6 collections, index fresh)
6. Security Guardrails:  8/10  ✗ (missing one policy file)
7. Cost Efficiency:       9/10  ✓ (tokens=10000, subagent=haiku, compaction=50)

TOTAL: 63/70 (A grade)

TOP 3 IMPROVEMENTS:
1. Add missing hook: /Users/{your-name}/Documents/HQ/.claude/hooks/observe-patterns.sh (S)
2. Write security policy: /Users/{your-name}/Documents/HQ/core/policies/company-isolation-validation.md (M)
3. Add /tdd skill at .claude/skills/tdd/SKILL.md (S)

NOTES:
- Hook coverage: Missing observe-patterns.sh (needed for Stop hook)
- All other infrastructure is robust and well-maintained

Example Output (JSON Mode)

{
  "audit_date": "2026-03-07T23:30:00Z",
  "total_score": 63,
  "max_score": 70,
  "grade": "A",
  "categories": [
    {
      "name": "Hook Coverage",
      "score": 8,
      "passed": 7,
      "total": 8,
      "details": "Missing observe-patterns.sh",
      "files": [
        ".claude/hooks/block-hq-glob.sh",
        ".claude/hooks/block-hq-grep.sh"
      ]
    },
    ...
  ],
  "improvements": [
    {
      "rank": 1,
      "description": "Add missing hook",
      "file": ".claude/hooks/observe-patterns.sh",
      "severity": "S",
      "reason": "Needed for Stop hook in settings.json"
    }
  ]
}

---

Implementation Guide

When running the audit, follow this process:

1. Check each category in order (hooks → context → gates → persistence → search → security → cost)
2. Count and verify specific files/configurations match the scoring rubric
3. Record details about what passed/failed in each category
4. Sum the scores and assign a grade (A-F)
5. Prioritize improvements by impact and effort

Sample Improvements by Score Category

High Impact (Cost Efficiency + Security):

• If CLAUDE.md > 400 lines: Extract content to knowledge files and use pointers instead
• If context diet non-compliant: Add notes to top of CLAUDE.md about lazy loading
• If MAX_THINKING_TOKENS > 10000: Change to "10000" in settings.json for 70% cost savings

Medium Impact (Infrastructure):

• If hooks missing: Copy from reference repo or recreate from policy templates
• If search collections <5: Run qmd collection add for new repos/knowledge bases
• If no /tdd command: Copy/adapt from working HQ or create minimal version

Low Impact (Nice-to-Have):

• If thread count low: This is natural — threads accumulate over time
• If checkpoint count low: Create a few intentional checkpoints to bootstrap persistence

Real Example Output

HQ INFRASTRUCTURE AUDIT REPORT
==============================

CATEGORY SCORES:
1. Hook Coverage:        10/10  (8/8 hooks installed, settings configured)
2. Context Efficiency:   0/10   (436 lines in CLAUDE.md — target <200)
3. Quality Gates:        8/10   (2/2 commands found, gates working)
4. Session Persistence: 10/10   (1032 threads, 2/2 commands, hook active)
5. Search Coverage:      10/10   (15 collections — excellent coverage)
6. Security Guardrails:  10/10   (4/4 security checks passed)
7. Cost Efficiency:      10/10   (all cost optimizations active)

TOTAL: 58/70 (B grade)

TOP IMPROVEMENTS:
1. Compress CLAUDE.md from 436 → <200 lines
   - Extract "Knowledge Bases" section to core/knowledge/public/hq-core/quick-reference.md
   - Replace inline company list with pointer to companies/manifest.yaml
   - Replace inline worker list with pointer to core/workers/registry.yaml (auto-generated from each worker.yaml)
   Impact: Saves ~200 lines, improves context efficiency score from 0 → 10

2. Expand search collections from 15 → 20+ (if planning new repos)
   - Add collections for new monorepos or knowledge bases as they're created
   - Current collections are well-maintained, no action needed
   Impact: Maintains A/B+ grade if new infrastructure added

3. Keep all other categories at 10/10
   - Hooks, security, persistence, cost efficiency all optimized
   - No changes needed — setup is excellent

Success Checklist

• All 7 categories audited
• Score calculated (total ÷ 70)
• Grade assigned (A-F)
• Top 3 improvements identified with specific file paths
• Output format matches chosen mode (text or JSON)
• Report is actionable (specific file edits, not abstract feedback)