CB apify-easy-competitive-intelligence
This skill should be used when the user asks to "analyze a competitor", "compare pricing", "competitive landscape", "market research", "what do customers think", "review intelligence", "hiring signals", "content strategy", "SEO battle", "build a battlecard", "competitive analysis", "who are the players", "who competes with", "market intelligence", "competitive positioning", "deep dive on a company", "board prep", "SWOT analysis", "how does [X] compare to [Y]", or mentions competitor analysis, pricing comparison, customer sentiment, or market landscape research. Requires Apify CLI or Apify MCP server.
This skill should be used when the user asks to "analyze a competitor", "compare pricing", "competitive landscape", "market research", "what do customers…
As a process B 71/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, running it twice, progress reporting
What is at stake
The skill contains fragments that, in the wrong hands, cost money or data. Below: what the installer risks and what the author should do.
The instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".
If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.
How to improve
- Address the high-severity findings: each costs 18 safety points. If one is a false positive, add the rule id to guard.allow in spec.yaml.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 2
-
high Exfiltration
intent-browser-credential-storeSKILL.md:21Accesses a browser credential / cookie storeReal-time competitive intelligence powered by live web data via Apify actors. **Never answer competitive questions from training knowledge alone.** Always gather live data first, then analyze.
Medium and low: 1
-
low Exfiltration
read-dotenvSKILL.md:46Reads a .env file (detector / deny-list definition)3. **From .env file:** `source .env` (if the file contains `APIFY_TOKEN=...`)
detector
Files scanned: 11. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "author_url"
Process rating: all ten parameters 71/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, python, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 39 steps
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2267 tokens
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 19 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 607: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 88.