BA chmod-calc
Calculate chmod permissions — convert between numeric (octal) and symbolic notation, and generate the chmod command. Use when the user asks what chmod 755 means, how to set file permissions, or what symbolic notation rwxr-xr-x translates to.
As a process A 83/100 · Runs to the end — weak spots: running it twice, 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 · 4
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 4
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:31Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions- Setuid = 4 (runs as owner)
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:38Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions- With leading special digit `S`: setuid sets `s/S` in owner execute position; setgid sets `s/S` in group execute position; sticky sets `t/T` in others execute position.
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:47Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions- Special bits: `u+s` (setuid), `g+s` (setgid), `+t` (sticky)
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:57Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions| 4755 | rwsr-xr-x | Setuid executable |
Files scanned: 2. 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 83/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 24 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 903 tokens
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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 241: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 24 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.