AC awesome-design
Use when user asks about design skills, UI skills, design tools, "what design skills are available", "help me design", "recommend a design skill", "UI/UX skill", "design workflow", "設計技能", "UI 技能", "設計工具推薦", or when the user needs guidance on which design skill to use for a specific task.
As a process C 57/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, 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
- 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-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Bash Read WebSearch
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-pipe-to-shellSKILL.md:110Downloads and executes remote code from an unrecognised host (pipe to shell) (negated — the text forbids it)- No `curl | sh` pipes or obfuscated code
negated -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:111Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- No credential harvesting (env var collection)
Files scanned: 2. 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 57/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 10 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2230 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 6 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 289: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.