BB wdh
Call any of seven paid-per-call CLI utilities on WDH.sh — big-file transfer (≤5 GB), URL shortening, Chart.js rendering, hosted markdown pages, QR codes, paid feature requests, paid support tickets — settled in USDC on Base mainnet via x402 with no signup or API key. Use when the user wants any of these utilities and has an EVM wallet, or mentions x402, USDC, micropayment, pay-per-call, or any of the wdh.sh hostnames (files.wdh.sh, short.wdh.sh, charts.wdh.sh, md.wdh.sh, qr.wdh.sh, feedback.wdh.sh, support.wdh.sh). Costs $0.001–$5.00 USDC per call depending on tool.
Call any of seven paid-per-call CLI utilities on WDH.sh — big-file transfer (≤5 GB), URL shortening, Chart.js rendering, hosted markdown pages, QR codes, paid…
As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: running it twice, progress reporting
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 purpose itself is risky: wallets, browser password stores, offensive security. Even an honest implementation gives the agent access to things that cost money.
Explain in the description why the access is needed and how it is limited; add tests that show refusals on dangerous requests.
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 Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsskill-card.md:25Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer targetRisk: Commands require a wallet private key that can authorize paid x402 requests.
Files scanned: 2. 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 68/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 10 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (node) 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
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 14 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2254 tokens
- low The response is described with custom markup (16 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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 572: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 16 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 14 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.