BC video-content-engine
Diagnose and transform any authorized video URL, upload, recording, transcript, podcast, interview, presentation, screen recording, webinar, ad, or published video into the strongest justified content portfolio. Use for video audits, format recommendations, long-form editing, mid-form explainers, Shorts and Reels, teasers, tutorials, case studies, paid cutdowns, captions, packaging, delivery, or publication preparation.
Diagnose and transform any authorized video URL, upload, recording, transcript, podcast, interview, presentation, screen recording, webinar, ad, or published…
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — 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 tells the agent to hide things from you: not to show errors, not to mention actions, to report differently from what was done. You lose the ability to see what the agent really did.
Transparency beats a smooth answer. If the goal is to hide technical noise, ask the agent to "summarise briefly", not to "not mention".
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 Concealment
en-hide-from-userreferences/editing-workflow.md:9Instruction to hide actions from the user (documentation of a security skill)When a required renderer or remote workspace is unavailable, name the gap and prepare the edit plan from available authorized evidence. Do not substitute another recording, silently upload footage, st
security skill
Files scanned: 12. 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 53/100
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 19 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2495 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 12 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 423: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 19 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 91.