BC aster-futures
Aster Futures request using the Aster API. Authentication uses EIP-712 ECDSA signing with API wallet. Supports mainnet.
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, 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
- 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 · 4
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 4
-
medium Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsreferences/authentication.md:141Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target* Never share your API wallet private key
-
medium Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsSKILL.md:214Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target* **API Wallet Private Key**: Your API wallet private key (for ECDSA signing)
-
medium Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsSKILL.md:237Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer targetLine 3: API wallet private key
-
medium Risky intent
intent-wallet-secretsSKILL.md:314Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target* Ask for API wallet private key
Files scanned: 2. 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 61/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4154 tokens
- 100Steps. 104 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
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)
- +3Description length 119: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 22 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 104 items
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.