AB obsidian-vault-context
Teach Claude to use an Obsidian vault as a shared workspace with persistent state across sessions. Covers vault navigation, orchestration file management, output routing, and bidirectional collaboration via Obsidian Headless. Use when the agent needs to read vault context, write output to the vault, update status/task files, or navigate folder structure. Triggers on "check status", "what's in the vault", "update tasks", "save this to the vault", "where should I put this", or any vault-related file operation.
As a process B 67/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegereferences/obsidian-headless-setup.md:84Privilege escalation / world-writable permissionssudo tee /etc/systemd/system/obsidian-sync.service << 'EOF'
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-background-processreferences/obsidian-headless-setup.md:103Starts a background / autostarted processsudo systemctl enable obsidian-sync
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 67/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 8 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Failures and branches. 4 branches
- 100Steps. 12 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1046 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +4No input/output examples
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 513: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 12 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.