BD code-review
代码审查 Skill - 自动化代码质量检查与报告生成工具。支持从 GitHub 等仓库克隆代码、执行多维度代码质量检查、生成结构化审查报告并按场景保存与分发。当用户提到"代码审查"、"code review"、"检查代码质量"、"审查报告"等审查操作时，或当用户明确提到对 code-review（本技能）执行"安装 / 更新 / 升级"操作时，或当用户主动提及使用本 skill / 调用本技能时，请使用本 skill。
As a process D 46/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
What is at stake
The skill contains fragments that, in the wrong hands, cost money or data. Below: what the installer risks and what the author should do.
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
- Address the high-severity findings: each costs 18 safety points. If one is a false positive, add the rule id to guard.allow in spec.yaml.
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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
-
high Dangerous commands
cmd-pipe-to-shellreferences/frontend_dependency_installation/node_environment.md:56Downloads and executes remote code from an unrecognised host (pipe to shell)curl https://get.volta.sh | bash
Medium and low: 1
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-install-from-urlreferences/python_dependency_installation/review_tools.md:113Installs a package from an untrusted URL / archive (detector / deny-list definition; documentation table row)| pip 安装超时或失败 | 临时切换镜像源：`pip install -i https://pypi.tuna.tsinghua.edu.cn/simple <package>` |
detectortable
Files scanned: 23. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 46/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 9 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1396 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 212: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 9 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (5 of 5)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.