CD danube
Governed tool access for your agent — one Danube API key unlocks your organization's own tools plus a large, growing catalog of ready-made services. Search, inspect, and execute tools over native MCP or plain curl, with explicit confirmation before anything that writes, sends, spends, or deletes.
Governed tool access for your agent — one Danube API key unlocks your organization's own tools plus a large, growing catalog of ready-made services.
As a process D 43/100 · Unfinished process — 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 tells the agent to hide things from you: not to show errors, not to mention actions, to report differently from what was done. You lose the ability to see what the agent really did.
Transparency beats a smooth answer. If the goal is to hide technical noise, ask the agent to "summarise briefly", not to "not mention".
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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 Concealment
en-hide-from-userSKILL.md:910Instruction to hide actions from the user (documentation table row)| `retry_after` | Danube's **rate limiter** | Yours to absorb: wait, then retry once. Don't mention it to the user |
table
Files scanned: 5. 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") - warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 33637 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 147, 308, 621, 877, 879, 906): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 43/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 10Execution cost. Instruction body is 33637 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 123 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (danube) differs from the folder (tools-marketplace)
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 85Steps. 86 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 5 branches, has a failure section
- 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 response is described with custom markup (20 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 297: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 86 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 66.