BC skill-manager
WorkBuddy Skill 全生命周期管理器。列出/查看/创建/删除/搜索/审计/打包/安装技能， 一站管理本地和内置市场的所有 Skill。触发词：技能管理, skill管理, 管理技能, skill manager, 列出技能, 技能列表, 审计技能, 技能审计, 删除技能, 创建技能, 技能健康检查, 清理技能, 技能打包, 重复技能检测。
As a process C 51/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Write Edit Bash Glob Grep WebFetch Skill TaskCreate TaskUpdate TaskList TaskGet AskUserQuestion Agent DeferExecuteTool ToolSearch
Files scanned: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "display_name" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "agent_created"
Process rating: all ten parameters 51/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 65 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1519 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (9 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
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -218 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 176: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 22 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 65 items
- +4Has examples (6 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 71.