AD security-scan
Security review workflow for OpenClaw skills and other small code folders. Use when auditing a skill before publishing or installing it, checking for dangerous code patterns, possible hardcoded secrets, risky file permissions, or lightweight supply-chain concerns. Best for quick static review and cautious go/no-go recommendations, not full malware analysis or sandbox forensics.
As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityskill-card.md:2Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Security review workflow for OpenClaw skills and other small code folders. Use when auditing a skill before publishing or installing it, checking for dangerous code patterns, possible hardcoded secret
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:3Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)description: Security review workflow for OpenClaw skills and other small code folders. Use when auditing a skill before publishing or installing it, checking for dangerous code patterns, possible har
Files scanned: 3. 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 49/100
- 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. 5 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Failures and branches. 2 branches
- 100Steps. 47 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1012 tokens
- 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 380: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 17 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 47 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.