BF hsb-test
Execute QA test plans on Holoscan Sensor Bridge hardware. Reads a user-provided test document, filters tests by the user's setup, determines which tests can run automatically, executes them with pass/fail evaluation, and produces a structured test results report.
Execute QA test plans on Holoscan Sensor Bridge hardware.
As a process F 64/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/phase-details.md
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.
- 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Write Edit MultiEdit Grep Glob Bash
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:266Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)REMOTE_SUDO Privilege escalation: 'sudo', 'sudo -n', or ''
Files scanned: 1. 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") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/phase-details.md - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "tools"
Process rating: all ten parameters 64/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: references/phase-details.md
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 73 steps
- 100Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Failures and branches. 5 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3964 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 12 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
- +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
- -4Absolute local paths (C:\Users, /home/…): not portable
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 263: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 30 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 73 items
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 62.