Auditing Experiments Flags
PostHogOfficialPublished by PostHog
- Skill
- Review and audit
- Data and AI
- MIT
- No issues found
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
This skill provides a structured approach to auditing PostHog experiments and feature flags. It enables users to perform quick checks on individual entities, scoped audits of specific domains, or comprehensive full-project audits. The skill uses defined check taxonomies to identify configuration errors, waste, and process violations, providing clear remediation actions for each finding.
What it does
- Performs configuration audits on PostHog experiments and feature flags.
- Identifies critical correctness issues, potential waste, and process violations.
- Supports single-entity checks, scoped domain audits, and full-project reviews.
- Categorizes findings by severity (CRITICAL, WARNING, INFO) and domain.
- Provides actionable remediation steps for every identified issue.
- Handles data gaps gracefully by noting skipped checks when activity logs are unavailable.
When to use it
- When you need to verify the health and setup of a specific experiment or feature flag.
- When performing routine hygiene checks to identify stale or misconfigured flags.
- When preparing for a launch to ensure experiment metrics and flag rollouts are correctly configured.
- When cleaning up project resources to reduce technical debt and waste.
Advantages
- Standardizes the auditing process across different experiments and flags.
- Prioritizes findings by severity to help focus on the most impactful issues first.
- Provides clear, actionable guidance for resolving configuration problems.
- Maintains consistency in reporting through a structured output format.
Usage examples
- “Audit the experiment with ID 42.”
- The agent fetches the experiment, runs all relevant configuration checks, and reports findings grouped by severity with actionable remediation steps.
- “Perform a health check on all active feature flags.”
- The agent retrieves all flags, evaluates them against best-practice criteria, and provides a summary report of any issues found.
- “Run a comprehensive audit of all experiments and flags in this project.”
- The agent performs a full audit, synthesizes recurring patterns across the project, and presents the findings in a structured report or notebook.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/posthog/auditing-experiments-flags/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip auditing-experiments-flags.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by PostHog
Auditing experiments and feature flags
This skill teaches you how to run configuration audits on experiments and feature flags.
All checks use the experiment and feature flag read tools (experiment-get, experiment-list, feature-flag-get-definition, feature-flag-get-all) — no SQL queries are needed for Phase 1 checks.
Usage modes
Quick check (single entity)
When the user asks about a specific experiment or flag:
Fetch the entity via
experiment-get(experiment ID) orfeature-flag-get-definition(numeric flag ID).Apply the relevant checks from experiment checks or flag checks.
Report findings inline as markdown, grouped by severity (CRITICAL first, then WARNING, then INFO).
Include entity links as
[Experiment: name](/experiments/id)or[Flag: key](/feature_flags/id).
Scoped audit (one domain)
When the user asks to audit all experiments or all flags:
Bulk-fetch via
experiment-listorfeature-flag-get-all.Run all checks for that domain against each entity.
Group findings by severity, then by entity.
Report as inline markdown.
Full audit (comprehensive)
When the user asks for a comprehensive audit of both experiments and flags:
Fetch all experiments via
experiment-listand all flags viafeature-flag-get-all.Run all experiment checks and all flag checks.
Apply recurring patterns to identify patterns across multiple findings.
If there are more than 5 entities with findings, write them to a notebook for easier navigation. Otherwise report inline. Create the notebook from the project's own notebook tools. Run
search notebooks?-to load them and read the titles.
Output format
For each finding, include:
Severity badge:
🔴 CRITICAL,🟡 WARNING, or🔵 INFOCheck name: Which check produced this finding
Entity link: Markdown link to the entity
What's wrong: One-sentence description
Action: What to do about it (see remediation actions)
Example:
🟡 WARNING — Flag integration · Experiment: checkout-redesign The linked feature flag is inactive (paused). Traffic is not being split. Action: Re-enable the flag or end the experiment.
Handling unavailable data
Some checks require activity logs (feature-flags-activity-retrieve for flags), which may not be available in every session.
If activity log data is unavailable:
Skip
checkActivityHistory(experiment check) entirely.Skip the "toggle instability" and "never activated" sub-checks in flag lifecycle checks.
In your report, note which checks were skipped and why:
Skipped: Activity history checks (activity logs not available via current tools)
Partial failures
If a fetch call fails for some entities:
Continue with the entities you could fetch.
Report which entities could not be assessed and why.
Do not silently omit entities from the audit.
Reference files
Experiment checks — experiment configuration checks
Flag checks — feature flag checks
Finding types — severity and category definitions
Recurring patterns — patterns across multiple findings
Remediation actions — what to do about each finding
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer871 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- SKILL.md3.8 KiB
- references/experiment-checks.md8.6 KiB
- references/finding-taxonomy.md2.6 KiB
- references/flag-checks.md5.4 KiB
- references/remediation-actions.md5.2 KiB
- references/synthesis-patterns.md1.5 KiB
references/finding-taxonomy.md
Finding types
Severities
| Severity | Badge | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL | 🔴 | Blocks correctness — experiment results may be invalid or flag behavior is broken |
| WARNING | 🟡 | Needs attention — not broken yet but risks exist or best practices are violated |
| INFO | 🔵 | Suggestion — hygiene improvement, safe to defer |
Finding categories
| Category | Description | Max severity |
|---|---|---|
| Correctness | Integrity issues that affect experiment results or flag evaluation | CRITICAL |
| Waste | Active resources not serving a purpose (running experiments going nowhere, flags nobody evaluates) | WARNING |
| Process | Methodology and practice issues (missing hypothesis, no metrics) | WARNING |
| Complexity | Fragility and maintainability concerns (too many toggles, high churn) | WARNING |
| Cleanup | Hygiene items — stale drafts, orphaned flags, safe to defer | INFO |
| Security | PII or access concerns in flag/experiment configuration | WARNING |
Severity caps
Never assign a severity higher than the category's max:
A Cleanup finding is always INFO, never WARNING or CRITICAL.
A Correctness finding can be CRITICAL, WARNING, or INFO depending on impact.
A Waste or Process finding caps at WARNING.
Finding format
When reporting a finding, always include:
Severity — one of CRITICAL, WARNING, INFO
Category — one of the categories above
Check name — which check produced this (e.g., "Metric setup", "Flag integration")
Entity — which experiment or flag, as a markdown link
Description — one sentence explaining what's wrong
Action — one sentence explaining what to do (reference remediation actions)
Ordering
When listing multiple findings:
Sort by severity: CRITICAL first, then WARNING, then INFO.
Within the same severity, group by entity.
Within the same entity, list by category: Correctness → Waste → Process → Complexity → Cleanup → Security.
Requirements and compatibility
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Security
No issues found by our static scan· No issues found
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Published by
- PostHog
- Publisher
- PostHog (Official)
- Source
- PostHog/skills · skills/omnibus/auditing-experiments-flags · commit a5d30e7
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by PostHog or PostHog.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download auditing-experiments-flags.zip