CC skill-audit-framework
Structured security and quality audit framework for AI agent skills. Teaches you what to check before installing any skill.
Structured security and quality audit framework for AI agent skills.
As a process C 52/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
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 · 3
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 3
-
medium Broad scope
meta-agent-memory-dumpMEMORY.mdAgent memory / workspace files bundled with the skill (1) — likely a workspace dump with personal data or tokensMEMORY.md
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityMEMORY.md:16Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Credential harvesting**: Skills requesting unrelated API keys and exfiltrating them
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-pipe-to-shellSKILL.md:87Downloads and executes remote code from an unrecognised host (pipe to shell) (negated — the text forbids it)- [ ] No `curl | bash` or `curl | python` install patterns
negated
Files scanned: 4. 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 "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 52/100
- 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. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Steps. 42 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1221 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
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 123: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 42 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.