# Audience Check > Read the README (or any front-door doc) through the eyes of several distinct audience personas and report what each would think, miss, or bounce on - **Type:** Skill - **Install:** `agentstack add skill-zernie-vigiles-audience-check` - **Verified:** Yes — security-reviewed for prompt injection and unsafe behavior - **Seller:** [zernie](https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/zernie) - **Installs:** 0 - **Category:** [Developer Tools](https://agentstack.voostack.com/c/developer-tools) - **Latest version:** 0.1.0 - **License:** MIT - **Upstream author:** [zernie](https://github.com/zernie) - **Source:** https://github.com/zernie/vigiles/tree/main/.claude/skills/audience-check - **Website:** https://vigiles.sh ## Install ```sh agentstack add skill-zernie-vigiles-audience-check ``` Requires the [AgentStack CLI](https://agentstack.voostack.com/docs/cli). Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and any MCP-compatible agent. ## About Re-read the README — or whichever front-door doc the user names — as **several different readers in turn**, not as the author. The author knows what every line means; a first-time reader does not. The job is to surface where a specific audience gets confused, under-served, or bounces, and to propose concrete fixes. This is an INTERNAL dev skill (not shipped to consumers). It complements the `readme-brevity` and `docs-quality` rules: those govern length/polish; this checks whether the content actually lands for who it's for. ## How to run it 1. **Read the target doc in full** (default: `README.md`; honor a path the user gives). Also skim the docs it links to, so "the README promises depth the doc doesn't deliver" is checkable. 2. **For each persona below, do a cold read** — adopt that reader's goals, vocabulary, and patience. Ask their questions, not yours. 3. **Produce the report** in the format at the end. Be specific: quote the exact line, name the exact fix. Vague notes ("could be clearer") are useless. ## The personas Run all of these unless the user scopes to a subset. ### 1. Claude Code user (the primary audience) Already lives in Claude Code; skimming on a laptop between tasks. Wants the WOW in the first screen and a copy-paste install in seconds. - Does the first screen land what vigiles does and why they'd care? - Is the install path (`npx vigiles init`, the agent prompt) above the fold and obviously runnable? - Does it speak their language (hooks, skills, CLAUDE.md, subagents) without over-explaining? ### 2. Codex user (the second-harness audience) Uses OpenAI Codex / `AGENTS.md`, not Claude Code. Skeptical that this is "a Claude thing." - Is Codex support visible early, or buried/footnoted so they assume it's CC-only? - Are the examples CC-only (CLAUDE.md, `claude` CLI) in a way that makes a Codex user feel like a second-class citizen? - Would they know `vigiles/codex` exists and what works vs. what's a documented follow-on? ### 3. Senior / staff engineer (the skeptic) Scans for substance and differentiation in ~20 seconds; allergic to marketing fluff. Will mentally compare to tools they know (promptfoo, ESLint, ast-grep). - Is the differentiation concrete and credible, or hand-wavy? Does every load-bearing claim link to proof? - Does the "deterministic, no API key / runs on your sub" cost angle come through as a real architectural fact, not a slogan? - Anything that reads as overclaiming will cost trust — flag it. ### 4. Junior engineer (the newcomer) New to agentic tooling; needs clarity, not jargon. Bounces on undefined terms. - Which terms are used before they're defined (harness, eval, trigger-rate, subagent, dialect)? - Is there a clear "what do I do first" path, or does it assume context they lack? ### 5. Engineering manager / decision-maker (adoption + ROI) Won't run a command; deciding whether the team should adopt. Cares about cost, risk, and effort. - Is the cost story (free deterministic tiers, evals on the existing Claude sub vs. metered per-token competitors) legible to a non-runner? - Is adoption framed as incremental/low-risk (start permissive, tighten later)? - What's the "why now / why us" — is it answerable from the README alone? ### 6. QA / test engineer (the Test pillar) Owns test infra; evaluates the testing story specifically. - Does the **Test** pillar speak to them — `runHook`, `runHarnessTest`, `measureTriggerRate`, significance/regression gating — or is it all about linting? - Is the deterministic-vs-real-model split clear (what runs in CI free vs. what needs a model)? - Would they trust it next to promptfoo/DeepEval, and is the comparison honest? ## Output format ``` # README audience check — ## — verdict: ✅ lands / ⚠ rough / ✗ bounces - **Reaction (cold read):** one or two sentences in this reader's voice. - **Friction:** the specific line(s)/section(s) that confuse or under-serve them. - **Fix:** the concrete change (move X above the fold, define Y on first use, link proof for claim Z, add a Codex example here). … one block per persona … ## Cross-cutting patterns The 2–4 issues that hurt MULTIPLE personas (these are the highest-leverage fixes). ## Ranked fixes A short, ordered list — highest reader-impact first — each a one-line action. ``` Keep the report scannable and ACTIONABLE: every finding names a line and a fix. Do not rewrite the README in place unless the user asks — this skill REPORTS; applying the fixes is a separate, explicit step. ## Source & license This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code. - **Author:** [zernie](https://github.com/zernie) - **Source:** [zernie/vigiles](https://github.com/zernie/vigiles) - **License:** MIT - **Homepage:** https://vigiles.sh Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above. ## Pricing - **Free** — Free ## Security capabilities Automated source analysis of v0.1.0 — what this tool can access: - **Network access:** no - **Filesystem access:** no - **Shell / process execution:** no - **Environment & secrets:** no - **Dynamic code execution:** no *"Yes" means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it is unsafe.* ## Versions - **0.1.0** — security scan: passed — Imported from the upstream source. ## Links - Listing page: https://agentstack.voostack.com/l/skill-zernie-vigiles-audience-check - Seller: https://agentstack.voostack.com/s/zernie - Browse the marketplace: https://agentstack.voostack.com/browse --- Listed on AgentStack — the marketplace for AI agent skills and MCP servers. Every listing is security-reviewed. Creators keep 70%.