AF medtech-model-evidence-export
Exports sanitized metadata, parameters, reproducibility details, quality metrics, and optional review artifacts from Medical AI inference runs or evidence packs to MLflow. Use after inference, including NV-Generate runs; not for live training tracking, model registration, or clinical use.
Exports sanitized metadata, parameters, reproducibility details, quality metrics, and optional review artifacts from Medical AI inference runs or evidence…
As a process F 54/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: scripts/export_evidence_pack.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: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/export_evidence_pack.py - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "permissions"
Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/export_evidence_pack.py
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 21 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1160 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 289: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 21 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.