BC klausnomi
Engage in conversations with Nomi AI companions via the bundled Python CLI.
As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
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.
- 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
-
high Exfiltration
intent-browser-credential-storeskill-card.md:34Accesses a browser credential / cookie store**Other Properties Related to Output:** [Requires python3 and NOMI_API_KEY; room and avatar operations may create or update local state under ./nomi/.] <br>
Files scanned: 3. 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 "supersedes"
Process rating: all ten parameters 63/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 15 mutating operations with no state check
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 60 steps
- 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1724 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (24 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)
- +3Description length 75: 120–800 characters recommended
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 60 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (0 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.