BB br-risk-analyzer
根据需求文档分析风险，分析代码漏洞。analyzes code changes between commits against requirement documents to identify and prioritize risk points.
As a process B 72/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: when it triggers, running it twice, progress reporting
AnalyzerSoftware developmentInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
For the model run — optional
- 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
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:32Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)| Security | Authorization, privilege escalation, injection vulnerabilities, sensitive data logging |
Files scanned: 5. 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 72/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 28 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1428 tokens
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 125: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.
External checks
ClawHub: clean
This is a benign code risk review skill, but it can save local notes and reports that may contain sensitive project details.
LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026