BB ethereum-wingman
Ethereum development tutor and builder for Scaffold-ETH 2 projects. Triggers on "build", "create", "dApp", "smart contract", "Solidity", "DeFi", "Ethereum", "web3", or any blockchain development task. ALWAYS uses fork mode to test against real protocol state.
As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice, progress reporting
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
For the model run — optional
- 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 · 6
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 6
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenAGENTS.md:126High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)cast rpc anvil_setBalance 0xBB…FCb 0x56…000
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenAGENTS.md:129High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)cast rpc anvil_impersonateAccount 0xBB…FCb
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenAGENTS.md:132High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)cast send 0x83…913 \
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenAGENTS.md:134High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)--from 0xBB…FCb --unlocked
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenAGENTS.md:506High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)address: "0x83…913",
quoted -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/historical-hacks.md:339Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)2. **Bug Bounty**: Incentivize white hats
Files scanned: 10. 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")
Process rating: all ten parameters 65/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 85Steps. 42 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2322 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)
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- -43 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- -33 of 3 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 259: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 26 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 42 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (19 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.
External checks
ClawHub: suspicious
This Ethereum helper is mostly coherent, but it needs review because it tells agents to run mutable remote setup code and can persist rules into Cursor.
LLM: suspicious (medium) · VirusTotal: benign · 10 Sept 2026