---

name: ln-610-code-comments-auditor description: Audit code comments and docstrings quality across 6 categories (WHY-not-WHAT, Density, Forbidden Content, Docstrings, Actuality, Legacy). Use when code needs comment review, after major refactoring, or as part of ln-100-documents-pipeline. Outputs Compliance Score X/10 per category + Findings + Recommended Actions.

Code Comments Auditor

Audit code comments and docstrings quality. Universal for any tech stack.

Purpose

• Verify comments explain WHY, not obvious WHAT
• Check comment density (15-20% ratio)
• Detect forbidden content (dates, author names, historical notes)
• Validate docstrings match function signatures
• Ensure comments match current code state
• Identify legacy comments and commented-out code

Invocation

• Direct: User invokes for code comment quality review
• Pipeline: Called by ln-100-documents-pipeline (Phase 5, if auditComments=true)

Workflow

1. Scan: Find all source files (auto-detect tech stack)
2. Extract: Parse inline comments + docstrings/JSDoc
3. Audit: Run 6 category checks (see Audit Categories below)
4. Score: Calculate X/10 per category
5. Report: Output findings and recommended actions

Audit Categories

#	Category	What to Check
1	WHY not WHAT	Comments explain rationale, not obvious code behavior; no restating code
2	Density (15-20%)	Comment-to-code ratio within range; not over/under-commented
3	No Forbidden Content	No dates/authors; no historical notes; no code examples in comments
4	Docstrings Quality	Match function signatures; parameters documented; return types accurate
5	Actuality	Comments match code behavior; no stale references; examples runnable
6	Legacy Cleanup	No TODO without context; no commented-out code; no deprecated notes

Output Format

## Code Comments Audit Report - [DATE]

### Compliance Score

| Category | Score | Issues |
|----------|-------|--------|
| WHY not WHAT | X/10 | N obvious comments |
| Density (15-20%) | X/10 | X% actual (target: 15-20%) |
| No Forbidden Content | X/10 | N forbidden items |
| Docstrings Quality | X/10 | N mismatches |
| Actuality | X/10 | N stale comments |
| Legacy Cleanup | X/10 | N legacy items |
| **Overall** | **X/10** | |

### Critical Findings

- [ ] **[Category]** `path/file:line` - Issue description. **Action:** Fix suggestion.

### Recommended Actions

| Priority | Action | Location | Category |
|----------|--------|----------|----------|
| High | Remove author name | src/X:45 | Forbidden |
| Medium | Update stale docstring | lib/Y:120 | Actuality |

Scoring Rules

Score	Meaning
10/10	No issues
8-9/10	Minor issues (small density deviation, few obvious comments)
6-7/10	Moderate issues (stale docstrings, some forbidden content)
4-5/10	Significant issues (major density problems, outdated comments)
1-3/10	Critical issues (author names, commented-out code blocks, broken docstrings)

Reference Files

• Comment rules and patterns: references/comments_rules.md

Critical Notes

• Fix code, not rules: NEVER modify rules files (*_rules.md, *_standards.md) to make violations pass. Always fix the code instead.
• Code is truth: When comment contradicts code, flag comment for update
• WHY > WHAT: Comments explaining obvious behavior should be removed
• Task IDs OK: Task/Story IDs in comments help with code traceability
• Universal: Works with any language; detect comment syntax automatically
• Based on: Claude Code comment-analyzer agent patterns

---

Version: 3.0.0 Last Updated: 2025-12-23