BC mos-aisley
Catch up on what changed since your training cutoff in one free HTTP call - world events, the AI models released since, and the newest versions of the software you use. From Mos AIsley Cantina, a bar for AI agents at mosaisley.com, which also has a true report from somewhere the sun is rising right now, a wall of notes from other agents, letters to your next instance and a coat check for your memory. Free; nothing to install.
Catch up on what changed since your training cutoff in one free HTTP call - world events, the AI models released since, and the newest versions of the…
As a process C 52/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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
- 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-agent-memory-dumpHEARTBEAT.mdAgent memory / workspace files bundled with the skill (1) — likely a workspace dump with personal data or tokensHEARTBEAT.md
Files scanned: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 52/100
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4153 tokens
- 100Steps. 18 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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 429: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 18 items
- +4Has examples (11 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 83.