kb-audit
GitHub用于审计知识库健康度，评估覆盖度、准确性及可发现性。通过分析工单驱动因素识别内容缺口与陈旧/重复文章，生成包含健康评分、修复列表及按工单拦截影响排序的优先待办事项清单，旨在提升自助服务效率并降低支持成本。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill kb-audit -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "kb-audit",
"description": "Audit a knowledge base \/ help center for coverage, accuracy, and findability. Use when asked to audit a help center, review KB health, find documentation gaps, reduce ticket volume with better docs, or prioritise what to write\/fix. Produces an audit — a health scorecard, content gaps (driven by top ticket drivers), stale\/duplicate\/low-findability articles, and a prioritised fix-and-create backlog."
}
Knowledge Base Audit Skill
A help center silently rots: articles go stale, gaps let tickets through, duplicates confuse search, and nobody notices until deflection drops. This skill audits it — scoring health, mapping gaps against your actual top ticket drivers (so you write what reduces volume, not what's easy), and flagging stale/ duplicate/unfindable content — then hands back a prioritised backlog of what to fix and create.
Required Inputs
Ask for these only if they aren't already provided:
- The KB — the article list/structure (titles, sections; or a sample if large).
- Top ticket drivers — the most common support topics/questions (the single most useful input — it's what should be documented).
- Signals if available — article views, search terms with no results, "was this helpful?" ratings, last-updated dates.
- The goal — reduce ticket volume, improve self-serve, onboard a new product area?
Output Format
KB Audit: [help center]
1. Health scorecard — a quick read across: coverage (are top topics documented?), freshness (how much is stale), findability (titles/search-friendly?), quality (answer-first, scannable?), structure (organised, no duplication). RAG per dimension.
| Dimension | Status | Note |
|---|
2. Coverage gaps (priority) — cross-reference top ticket drivers against existing articles. The gaps where high ticket volume meets no/poor article = the highest-ROI things to write. Rank them.
3. Fix list — existing articles that are stale (outdated steps/screenshots), duplicate/overlapping (consolidate — they split search authority), hard to find (bad title, missing search terms), or low-quality (answer buried, not scannable).
4. Prioritised backlog — combine create + fix, ranked by ticket-deflection impact × effort:
| # | Action (create/fix/merge) | Article/topic | Why (impact) | Effort |
|---|
5. Quick wins — the 3–5 highest-impact, lowest-effort items to do first (often: fix the title on a high-traffic article, write the one missing top-driver doc).
Quality Checks
- Gaps are driven by actual top ticket drivers, not guesswork (write what deflects volume)
- Scorecard covers coverage, freshness, findability, quality, and structure
- Stale, duplicate, and low-findability articles are specifically flagged
- The backlog is prioritised by deflection impact × effort, not alphabetically
- Quick wins are separated out so there's an obvious place to start
Anti-Patterns
- Do not prioritise by what's easy to write — prioritise by what deflects the most tickets
- Do not ignore duplicates — overlapping articles split search ranking and confuse users; merge them
- Do not treat all gaps equally — a gap on a top-5 ticket driver outranks ten niche ones
- Do not skip findability — a perfect article with a bad title that no one finds deflects nothing
- Do not audit without the ticket data if it exists — it's the map of what actually matters
Based On
Knowledge-base / support-content practice — ticket-driver-led gap analysis, content health scoring, deflection-impact prioritisation.
Version History
- a38bc30 Current 2026-07-05 11:27
