BD polymarket-weather-trader
Trade Polymarket weather markets using NOAA (US) and Open-Meteo (international) forecasts via Simmer API. Inspired by gopfan2's $2M+ strategy. Use when user wants to trade temperature markets, automate weather bets, check forecasts, or run gopfan2-style trading.
Trade Polymarket weather markets using NOAA (US) and Open-Meteo (international) forecasts via Simmer API.
As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, consistency
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 purpose itself is risky: wallets, browser password stores, offensive security. Even an honest implementation gives the agent access to things that cost money.
Explain in the description why the access is needed and how it is limited; add tests that show refusals on dangerous requests.
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
medium Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsSKILL.md:69Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target2. **Ask for wallet private key** (required for live trading)
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenSKILL.md:267High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (quoted — discussed, not commanded)- Polymarket uses **USDC.e** (bridged USDC, contract `0x27…174`) — not native USDC
quoted
Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 93): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (polymarket-weather-trader) differs from the folder (dolph-weather-trader)
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 80 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2677 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- low 13 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 262: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 19 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 80 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.