AC remediating-with-aws-security-agent
Pull AWS Security Agent findings (penetration tests and code reviews) and drive remediation. Use this whenever the user mentions Security Agent, security findings, pentest or penetration test results, code review findings, vulnerabilities found in their AWS account, "what did the security scan find", remediating or triaging security risks, or wants to start fixing reported vulnerabilities — even if they don't name the service explicitly. Trigger it for phrases like "get my security findings", "what vulnerabilities do we have", "let's fix the pentest results", or "triage the security report". The skill discovers scans, exports findings to a gitignored local directory (so sensitive exploit detail is never committed), produces a prioritized triage summary, and offers to start fixing the highest-risk issues.
Pull AWS Security Agent findings (penetration tests and code reviews) and drive remediation.
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
How to improve
- 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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 0. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 24 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 3 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2672 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low The skill ranks results itself: that belongs to the system behind the tool, not the model
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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)
- +3Description length 815: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 24 items
- +4Has examples (7 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.