BD yotta-vetter
元审 —— 安装任何技能前的安全审查协议：四阶段 checklist（来源→代码→权限→风险）+ 轻量 checker，与元安联动深度扫描。触发：安装/评估任何技能前、从市场或 GitHub 获取技能、审查他人分享的技能、任何「要装未知代码」的场景；或用户说 审查/审查技能/vetting/技能安全审查/检查技能 等。边界：checker 只做初审与报告，结论需人工确认；绝不代替最终决策。
元审 —— 安装任何技能前的安全审查协议：四阶段 checklist（来源→代码→权限→风险）+ 轻量 checker，与元安联动深度扫描。触发：安装/评估任何技能前、从市场或 GitHub 获取技能、审查他人分享的技能、任何「要装未知代码」的场景；或用户说 审查/审查技能/vetting/技能安全审查/检查技能…
As a process D 46/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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
- 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 · 7
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 7
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-persistencescripts/vetter_rules.py:88Persistence mechanism (cron / launchd / scheduled task / autorun registry) (string literal in code, not executed; documentation of a security skill)"macOS 启动代理/守护（LaunchAgents/LaunchDaemons plist）持久化", 70),
code literalsecurity skill -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/vetter_rules.py:180Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed; documentation of a security skill)"chmod 设置 setuid/setgid/sticky 权限位", 85),
code literalsecurity skill -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/vetter_rules.py:183Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed; documentation of a security skill)"chmod 777 全权限", 70),
code literalsecurity skill -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/vetter_rules.py:186Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed; documentation of a security skill)"调用 setuid/setgid", 80),
code literalsecurity skill
A further 3 matches are quotations in this security skill's documentation and are not counted as findings.
Files scanned: 14. 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) that frontmatter does not declare
- 100Steps. 11 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 445 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
- +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
- -31 of 3 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 196: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 11 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.