wm-gap-auditor

name: wm-gap-auditor description: Audit implementation gaps and risks between the current watermarking project and stated research goals. Use when users ask for gap audit, risk audit, goal alignment, static code audit, or a split report of static-confirmable gaps vs gaps that require real SD workflow.

wm-gap-auditor

Produce a defensible gap audit tied to repository evidence.

Execute

1. Extract target claims from user text and project docs.
2. Build a claim-to-anchor map with configs/ and main/ as the core release truth source; use scripts/ and tests/ only as auxiliary evidence.
3. Validate each claim with static evidence first:

• Read implementation paths.
• Read contract/config paths.
• Run only relevant tests or audit scripts when they can decide the claim, but do not let helper script behavior override main/.

4. Classify each gap item into exactly one bucket:

• static-audit-confirmable
• requires-real-sd-workflow

5. If the user mandates a fixed phrase for undecidable items, output that phrase exactly.

Required Output Shape

For every item include:

• gap_item
• risk_level (high/medium/low)
• evidence (file path or test name)
• reasoning
• fix_or_validation_action

Repository Anchors

Prioritize these anchors before expanding search:

• configs/paper_faithfulness_spec.yaml
• notebook/Colab_Workflow.ipynb
• main/watermarking/content_chain/
• main/watermarking/geometry_chain/
• main/watermarking/fusion/
• main/policy/
• tests/test_onefile_workflow.py
• tests/test_publish_workflow_uses_paper_profile_by_default.py
• tests/test_paper_faithfulness_gate.py

Use these only as auxiliary workflow anchors after core files:

• scripts/run_onefile_workflow.py
• notebook/Colab_Workflow.ipynb

Classification Rules

• Put into static bucket if code/contracts/tests already prove presence, absence, or violation.
• Put into real-workflow bucket if conclusion depends on SD model runtime behavior, generated image quality, attack robustness curves, or end-to-end geometry recovery under real inference.