BB database-doc-generator
Generate professional database structure documentation from PostgreSQL databases. Creates Excel files with table schemas, column details, and formatting. Use when user needs to document database structure, export schema information, or create data dictionaries. Triggers on phrases like "generate database documentation", "export database schema", "create data dictionary", "database structure export", "PostgreSQL documentation".
As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, progress reporting
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 contains commands that delete files, rewrite disks or execute code fetched from the network. The agent may run them without asking if it believes the instructions require it.
Replace destructive commands with safe equivalents that ask for confirmation, scope them to one folder, and stop piping curl into a shell: pin a version and a checksum.
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 Dangerous commands
cmd-install-from-urlINSTALLATION_SECURE.md:154Installs a package from an untrusted URL / archive (documentation of a security skill)pip install --index-url https://pypi.company.com/simple psyc…ary pandas openpyxl
security skill -
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-install-from-urlINSTALLATION_SECURE.md:233Installs a package from an untrusted URL / archive (documentation of a security skill)pip install --proxy http://prox…080 psyc…ary
security skill -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityEMERGENCY_RESPONSE.md:68Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- Penetration testing
Files scanned: 20. 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 66/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 48 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1473 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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)
- -43 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- -32 of 4 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 430: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 23 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 48 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (13 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.