audit_links

🔍 Audit Links Skill

Fast audit of vault structure to catch:

• •Orphan papers (not linked to any project)
• •Orphan projects (not linked to any MOC)
• •Broken bidirectional links (paper→project without reciprocal project→paper)
• •Forbidden concept links (e.g., [[Attention Mechanism]])
• •Papers linking directly to MOCs (forbidden)
• •Malformed wiki links

CRITICAL RULES

Vault constraints (non-negotiable):

1. •Every paper in Reading/ must link to ≥1 project in Projects/
2. •Every project in Projects/ must link to ≥1 MOC in MOCs/
3. •Bidirectional links: If paper→project exists, project→paper must exist
4. •Papers never link directly to MOCs
5. •Papers link only to projects and other papers
6. •Concept/method/technique links forbidden (e.g., [[Transformer]], [[Attention Mechanism]])

WORKFLOW

1. Get audit scope

Ask user:

• •Full audit? (scan entire vault)
• •Targeted audit? (specific project, paper, or MOC)
• •Quick scan? (only orphans + broken bidirectional links)

2. Run lightweight scan

For papers in Reading/:

• •Extract all [[wiki links]] from each paper
• •Verify each link points to a project in Projects/ or paper in Reading/
• •Flag: Papers with zero project links (orphan papers)
• •Flag: Papers linking directly to MOCs/ files (forbidden)
• •Flag: Concept links like [[Attention]], [[Transformers]] (forbidden)

For projects in Projects/:

• •Extract all [[wiki links]] from each project
• •Verify each links to MOC or paper
• •Flag: Projects with zero MOC links (orphan projects)

For bidirectional consistency:

• •For each paper→project link found: verify reciprocal project→paper link exists
• •Flag: Missing reciprocal links

3. Compile report

Group findings by violation type:

1. •Orphan papers (not linked to any project)
2. •Orphan projects (not linked to any MOC)
3. •Broken bidirectional links (paper→project without project→paper)
4. •Forbidden concept links (in papers)
5. •Forbidden paper→MOC links
6. •Malformed links (broken wiki syntax)

Include:

• •File name
• •Problematic link/content
• •Suggested fix

4. Present findings

• •Show violations by category
• •Prioritize by severity (orphans > broken bidirectional > concept links)
• •Offer fixes: "Should I remove this link?" / "Should I add reciprocal link?"

5. Apply fixes

Only with user approval:

• •Remove orphan papers/projects (ask first)
• •Fix broken bidirectional links
• •Remove forbidden concept links
• •Remove paper→MOC links

TOKEN EFFICIENCY

Optimizations:

• •Use grep patterns to find links fast: \[\[.*\]\]
• •Don't read full file contents unless necessary
• •Process files by type (papers, projects, MOCs)
• •Early exit on first issue per file
• •Report summaries, not line-by-line details

Avoid:

• •Reading every file in full (extract links only)
• •Deep analysis of content (only validate structure)
• •Redundant checks across multiple passes

OUTPUT RULES

• •Concise summary first
• •Group violations by type
• •Each violation: file name + issue + suggested fix
• •No prose, bullets only
• •Fast scan report (~100-200 tokens)

SELF-CHECK

✅ Did I scan all papers for orphans? ✅ Did I check all projects for MOC links? ✅ Did I verify bidirectional consistency? ✅ Did I identify concept links in papers? ✅ Did I find paper→MOC direct links? ✅ Report grouped by violation type? ✅ Did I get user approval before fixing?