AC amazon-jobs-research
Researches Amazon.jobs postings via the Crawlora API — search Amazon's public careers site by keyword and/or job category, then pull any single posting's full description and qualifications by job id — returning clean JSON. Use when the user wants to search Amazon job openings, browse a specific Amazon job category, or fetch the detail for one Amazon job posting.
As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, 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 instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".
If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.
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 Exfiltration
net-credential-useSKILL.md:55Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service)curl -fsS -H "x-api-key: $CRAWLORA_API_KEY" \
-
low Exfiltration
net-credential-usescripts/crawlora.sh:16Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service) (the skill's own vendor host; quoted — discussed, not commanded): "${CRAWLORA_API_KEY:?Set CRAWLORA_API_KEY first — get a free key at https://crawlora.net?utm_source=…&utm_medium=…&utm_campaign=…"vendor-hostquoted
Files scanned: 4. 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 54/100
- 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. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 16 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 847 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (4 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
- +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 365: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 16 items
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 91.