SKILLEMALL.ai

AB snyk-agent-scan-compliance

Compliance expert for snyk-agent-scan — the agent skill file scanner — NOT for other Snyk CLI tools (snyk test, snyk code SAST, snyk iac, snyk container). Fixes alerts through content restructuring, never by suppressing or deleting information. Covers every file in a skill directory: SKILL.md, references/, assets/, and any secondary markdown. Apply when authoring a new skill, editing an existing one, triaging a failed snyk-agent-scan run locally or in CI, or unblocking a PR held by agent scanner failures. Not applicable to dependency vulnerabilities, code security findings, or infrastructure misconfigurations — those are out of scope.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Samuel Berthe v1.1.0 MIT-0 6 files body ≈ 1 767 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 4 d ago

As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

IntegrationAI and agentsSecuritytype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
96
Quality 40%
93
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
66/100
Nearly there
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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

    ✓ Guard found no suspicious behaviour. 4 matches are attack strings quoted in this security skill's own documentation.

    Files scanned: 5. 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 66/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100Steps. 17 steps
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1767 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
    • low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable

    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 642: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 10 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
    • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 93.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    The skill is a real scanner-compliance helper, but it repeatedly steers users to move risky install instructions into less-visible frontmatter and treats that as safe, so changes should be reviewed carefully.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · 21 Aug 2026