BC local-document-ai-openvino
Private local document AI for Intel hardware. Parse PDFs, invoices, screenshots, and diagrams with MinerU 2.5 on OpenVINO GenAI, keep the model warm in a local service, and output structured JSON/Markdown with user-defined invoice fields.
As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, 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 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-execpolicy-bypassSKILL.md:60Runs PowerShell with execution policy bypassedpowershell -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File "{baseDir}/scripts/install.ps1" -
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-execpolicy-bypassSKILL.md:91Runs PowerShell with execution policy bypassedpowershell -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File "{baseDir}/scripts/demo…ps1"
Files scanned: 25. 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 58/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4158 tokens
- 85Steps. 147 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Failures and branches. 3 branches, has a failure section
- 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
- low 21 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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)
- -35 of 15 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 238: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 30 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 147 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (37 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 76.