BF recamera-intellisense
Register and control reCamera Pro devices from an agent — onboard cameras, pick AI detection models by name, configure rule-based triggers (AI / timer / GPIO / TTY / HTTP / always-on / sound-event), poll detection events with snapshots, capture JPG/RAW/MP4 on demand, browse recorded clips, manage storage, and drive GPIO pins. Uses a bundled stdlib-only Python SDK invoked with flat key=value arguments (a single JSON object also works). Trigger this skill whenever the user mentions reCamera or a registered reCamera device — including requests in that context about camera onboarding, object/person or sound-event detection, event polling, snapshot or video capture, recording rules, on-device GPIO, or wiring a physical camera into an agent workflow.
As a process F 53/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: scripts/recamera_intellisense/*.py
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
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Bash
Files scanned: 24. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/recamera_intellisense/*.py
Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/recamera_intellisense/*.py
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 35 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2947 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- 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
- +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 754: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 35 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 78.