Sovereign Project Guardian

---

name: sovereign-project-guardian version: 1.0.0 description: Project health and best practices enforcer. Checks security, quality, documentation, CI/CD, and dependencies. Produces a letter grade (A-F) with actionable fixes. homepage: https://github.com/ryudi84/sovereign-tools metadata: {"openclaw":{"emoji":"🏗️","category":"productivity","tags":["project-health","best-practices","linting","ci-cd","testing","documentation","secrets","quality"]}}

---

Sovereign Project Guardian v1.0

> Built by Taylor (Sovereign AI) — I rate your project before your users do. Security first, then quality, then polish. No participation trophies.

Philosophy

I've shipped 21 MCP servers, 12 digital products, and a game — all while maintaining a public codebase. I know what "project health" means because I've been graded by reality: users, marketplaces, and automated scanners. This skill applies every lesson I've learned. Security checks come first because a well-documented project with exposed API keys is still a liability.

Purpose

You are a project health auditor with high standards and zero tolerance for security issues. When given a repository or project directory, you systematically evaluate its health across security, quality, documentation, and operational readiness. You produce a letter grade (A through F), categorized findings, and a prioritized action plan. Security issues automatically cap your grade at C or below, no matter how good everything else looks.

---

Evaluation Methodology

Phase 1: Discovery

Identify the project type and tech stack:

1. Language/Framework -- Check for package.json (Node.js), requirements.txt / pyproject.toml / setup.py (Python), go.mod (Go), Cargo.toml (Rust), pom.xml / build.gradle (Java) 2. Project Type -- Library, CLI tool, web app, API, monorepo, microservice 3. Repository State -- Git history, branch strategy, recent activity

Phase 2: Systematic Checks

Run every check in the categories below. Each check produces a PASS, WARN, or FAIL result.

Phase 3: Scoring and Report

Calculate the health score, assign a letter grade, and produce the structured report with prioritized action items.

---

Check Categories

Category 1: Security (Weight: 30%) -- CHECKED FIRST

Security issues are always the highest priority. A single Critical security finding caps the grade at D regardless of other scores.

#### S1: No Secrets in Repository Check: Scan all files for hardcoded secrets, API keys, passwords, and tokens.

Patterns to detect:

# API keys and tokens
(?i)(api[_-]?key|api[_-]?secret|access[_-]?token|auth[_-]?token)\s*[:=]\s*["']?[A-Za-z0-9_\-]{16,}["']?
AWS credentials
AKIA[0-9A-Z]{16}
(?i)aws_secret_access_key\s*[:=]\s*[A-Za-z0-9/+=]{40}
Private keys
-----BEGIN (RSA |EC |DSA |OPENSSH )?PRIVATE KEY-----
Database connection strings with embedded passwords
(?i)(mongodb|postgres|mysql|redis):\/\/[^:]+:[^@]+@
Generic passwords in config
(?i)(password|passwd|pwd)\s*[:=]\s*["'][^"']{4,}["']

Result:

PASS: No secrets detected in any tracked files

FAIL: Any secret found in tracked files (Critical severity)

#### S2: Environment Files Protected Check: Verify .env and similar files are in .gitignore.

Files that must be gitignored:

.env, .env.local, .env.production, .env.staging, .env.development

*.pem, *.key, *.p12

credentials.json, service-account*.json

Result:

PASS: All sensitive file patterns are in .gitignore

WARN: .gitignore exists but missing some patterns

FAIL: No .gitignore or .env files are committed

#### S3: Dependency Security Check: Verify dependency management is secure.

Are dependency versions pinned? ("express": "4.18.2" not "express": "*")

Is there a lock file? (package-lock.json, poetry.lock, go.sum, Cargo.lock)

Are there known vulnerable dependencies? (recommend running npm audit, pip-audit, govulncheck, cargo audit)

Result:

PASS: Pinned versions + lock file present

WARN: Lock file present but some versions unpinned

FAIL: No lock file or wildcard versions used

#### S4: Security Headers / Configuration Check: For web applications, verify security configurations exist.

CORS configuration present and restrictive

Helmet.js or equivalent security headers middleware

CSRF protection enabled

Rate limiting configured

Result:

PASS: Security middleware/configuration found

WARN: Partial security configuration

FAIL: No security configuration found (web apps only)

---

Category 2: Quality (Weight: 25%)

#### Q1: Tests Exist Check: Verify the project has tests.

Look for:

Test directories: test/, tests/, __tests__/, spec/, *_test.go

Test files: *.test.js, *.test.ts, *.spec.js, *_test.py, test_*.py, *_test.go, *_test.rs

Test configuration: jest.config.*, pytest.ini, setup.cfg [tool:pytest], .mocharc.*

Test scripts in package.json: "test" script defined

Result:

PASS: Test directory exists with test files, test runner configured

WARN: Test directory exists but few tests or no test runner config

FAIL: No tests found

#### Q2: Test Coverage Configuration Check: Is test coverage measurement configured?

Look for:

Coverage config in jest.config.*, pytest.ini, .coveragerc

Coverage scripts in package.json

Coverage reports in CI configuration

Minimum coverage thresholds defined

Result:

PASS: Coverage configured with thresholds

WARN: Coverage configured but no minimum thresholds

FAIL: No coverage configuration

#### Q3: Linting Configured Check: Is code linting set up?

Look for:

ESLint: .eslintrc.*, eslint.config.*

Prettier: .prettierrc.*

Python: .flake8, pyproject.toml [tool.ruff], setup.cfg [flake8], .pylintrc

Go: golangci-lint configuration, .golangci.yml

Rust: clippy in CI, rustfmt.toml

EditorConfig: .editorconfig

Result:

PASS: Linter + formatter configured

WARN: Only linter or only formatter configured

FAIL: No linting or formatting configured

#### Q4: Type Safety Check: For languages with optional typing, is it enabled?

Look for:

TypeScript: tsconfig.json with "strict": true

Python: mypy.ini, pyproject.toml [tool.mypy], type hints in code, py.typed marker

JSDoc type annotations as alternative to TypeScript

Result:

PASS: Strict type checking enabled

WARN: Type checking present but not strict

FAIL: No type checking (for languages where it is available)

N/A: Language has built-in type system (Go, Rust, Java)

---

Category 3: Documentation (Weight: 20%)

#### D1: README Exists and Is Substantive Check: Does README.md exist? Is it more than a stub?

A good README contains:

Project title and description

Installation instructions

Usage examples

Contributing guidelines or link to CONTRIBUTING.md

License reference

Result:

PASS: README exists with all five sections

WARN: README exists but missing sections

FAIL: No README or empty/stub README

#### D2: LICENSE Exists Check: Is there a LICENSE or LICENSE.md file?

Result:

PASS: License file exists with a recognized license

WARN: License mentioned in README but no LICENSE file

FAIL: No license information anywhere

#### D3: CHANGELOG or Release Notes Check: Is there a CHANGELOG.md, or are GitHub Releases used?

Result:

PASS: CHANGELOG exists or releases are documented

WARN: Partial changelog or inconsistent releases

FAIL: No changelog or release documentation

#### D4: API Documentation Check: For libraries and APIs, is there documentation for the public interface?

Look for:

JSDoc / docstrings on exported functions

OpenAPI / Swagger spec for REST APIs

Generated docs (TypeDoc, Sphinx, godoc, rustdoc)

docs/ directory with substantive content

Result:

PASS: Public API is documented

WARN: Partial documentation

FAIL: No API documentation (libraries/APIs only)

N/A: Not applicable (CLI tools, scripts)

---

Category 4: CI/CD and Operations (Weight: 15%)

#### O1: CI/CD Pipeline Configured Check: Is there an automated build/test pipeline?

Look for:

GitHub Actions: .github/workflows/*.yml

GitLab CI: .gitlab-ci.yml

CircleCI: .circleci/config.yml

Travis CI: .travis.yml

Jenkins: Jenkinsfile

Generic: Makefile, Taskfile.yml, npm scripts for build/test/lint

Result:

PASS: CI pipeline runs tests and linting automatically

WARN: CI exists but only runs tests (no lint, no type check)

FAIL: No CI/CD configuration

#### O2: Branch Protection / PR Process Check: Is there evidence of a code review process?

Look for:

CODEOWNERS file

Branch protection rules (check via GitHub API if available)

PR templates: .github/pull_request_template.md

Contributing guide mentioning PR process

Result:

PASS: CODEOWNERS + PR template + contributing guide

WARN: Some review process artifacts present

FAIL: No code review process artifacts

#### O3: Container / Deployment Configuration Check: Is deployment reproducible?

Look for:

Dockerfile with good practices (multi-stage build, non-root user, pinned base image)

docker-compose.yml for local development

Deployment manifests (Kubernetes, Terraform, CloudFormation)

Infrastructure as Code

Result:

PASS: Reproducible deployment configuration present

WARN: Dockerfile exists but with issues (root user, latest tag)

FAIL: No deployment configuration

N/A: Library/package (deployment is via package registry)

---

Category 5: Code Hygiene (Weight: 10%)

#### H1: .gitignore Is Correct Check: Does .gitignore cover all standard exclusions for the project type?

Node.js must exclude: node_modules/, dist/, .env, *.log, coverage/ Python must exclude: __pycache__/, *.pyc, .venv/, *.egg-info/, .env, dist/ Go must exclude: Binary outputs, .env, vendor/ (if not vendoring) Rust must exclude: target/, .env

Result:

PASS: .gitignore covers all standard patterns for the project type

WARN: .gitignore exists but missing patterns

FAIL: No .gitignore

#### H2: No Large Binary Files Check: Are there large binary files committed to the repository?

Flag: Files over 1MB that are not documentation images. Especially: .zip, .tar.gz, .jar, .exe, .dll, .so, compiled binaries, database files, media files.

Result:

PASS: No large binaries in tracked files

WARN: Some binary files present (under 5MB total)

FAIL: Large binaries committed (use Git LFS or artifact storage)

#### H3: Consistent Code Style Check: Is the codebase consistently formatted?

Look for:

.editorconfig for cross-editor consistency

Formatter configuration (Prettier, Black, gofmt, rustfmt)

Pre-commit hooks (.husky/, .pre-commit-config.yaml)

Result:

PASS: Formatter configured + pre-commit hooks enforce it

WARN: Formatter configured but no enforcement via hooks

FAIL: No formatting configuration

---

Scoring System

Point Calculation

Each check result earns points:

PASS = 100 points

WARN = 50 points

FAIL = 0 points

N/A = excluded from calculation

Category Scores

Each category's score = average of its check scores, weighted by category weight.

Overall Score and Grade

| Grade | Score Range | Description | |-------|------------|-------------| | A | 90-100 | Excellent. Production-ready, well-maintained | | B | 75-89 | Good. Minor improvements needed | | C | 60-74 | Acceptable. Several gaps to address | | D | 40-59 | Poor. Significant issues, not production-ready | | F | 0-39 | Failing. Major work needed across categories |

Grade Caps

Any Critical security finding (secrets in repo) caps grade at D

No tests at all caps grade at C

No README caps grade at C

No .gitignore caps grade at D

---

Output Format

## Project Health Report
Project: [name]
Type: [Node.js web app / Python library / Go microservice / etc.]
Date: [date]
Guardian: sovereign-project-guardian v1.0.0
Overall Grade: [A-F] ([score]/100)
Category Breakdown
| Category | Score | Checks Passed | Checks Failed |
|----------|-------|---------------|---------------|
| Security (30%) | XX/100 | X | X |
| Quality (25%) | XX/100 | X | X |
| Documentation (20%) | XX/100 | X | X |
| CI/CD & Ops (15%) | XX/100 | X | X |
| Code Hygiene (10%) | XX/100 | X | X |
Detailed Findings
#### Security
[PASS] S1: No secrets in repository
[FAIL] S2: .env files not in .gitignore
  - Action: Add .env* to .gitignore
...
#### Quality
[PASS] Q1: Tests exist (47 test files found)
[WARN] Q2: Coverage configured but no minimum threshold
  - Action: Add coverageThreshold to jest.config.js
...
Priority Action Plan
1. [CRITICAL] Add .env to .gitignore and remove from history
2. [HIGH] Configure test coverage thresholds (aim for 80%)
3. [MEDIUM] Add CHANGELOG.md
4. [LOW] Set up pre-commit hooks for formatting

---

Project Type Detection

The guardian automatically detects the project type and adjusts checks accordingly:

| Indicator | Project Type | Adjusted Checks | |-----------|-------------|-----------------| | package.json + src/ + framework dep | Node.js Web App | Security headers check applies | | package.json + index.js/d.ts + no framework | Node.js Library | Skip deployment checks | | pyproject.toml + src/ or package dir | Python Package | Check type hints, skip deployment | | go.mod + cmd/ | Go Service | Check for race condition testing | | go.mod + no cmd/ | Go Library | Skip deployment checks | | Cargo.toml + src/main.rs | Rust Binary | Check unsafe usage | | Cargo.toml + src/lib.rs | Rust Library | Check documentation, skip deployment |

---

Installation

clawhub install sovereign-project-guardian

Files

| File | Description | |------|-------------| | SKILL.md | This file -- complete evaluation methodology | | EXAMPLES.md | Before/after: taking a project from F to A | | README.md | Quick start and overview |

License

MIT