I believe [meta-tag:review-audits] is a better tag name than [meta-tag:audits]. The main reason is what you say: it is less ambiguous. But there is another, minor reason.

[meta-tag:review-audits] will be easier to find and, *for users who are less familiar with meta*, easier to apply. This is because its name contains both "review" and "audits". When askers are typing into the tag box on their posts, or searching for tags at https://meta.askubuntu.com/tags, [meta-tag:review-audits] will come up when they (start to) type "review" as well as when they (start to) type "audits".

In contrast, [meta-tag:audits] does not come up, in either place, when one types "review" -- nor even when one types "review-audits", which perhaps explains how the [meta-tag:review-audits] tag came into existence even though we already had [meta-tag:audits]. This is to say that the system matches the *entirety* of what we type into the tag box or tag search against *any part* of any existing tag name.

The reason I say this is a minor reason is that having either tag as a synonym of the other should be sufficient to guide people to the main.