BC generate-images-with-firebase-ai
Use when generating or editing images from Flutter/Dart with Firebase AI Logic and a Gemini image model (Nano Banana), making the first call work, choosing Gemini Developer API vs Vertex AI, hitting quota, billing or App Check failures, getting empty or image-only responses, sending a user photo as input, controlling aspect ratio or size, writing the image prompt, or deciding what to test.
Use when generating or editing images from Flutter/Dart with Firebase AI Logic and a Gemini image model (Nano Banana), making the first call work, choosing…
As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Exfiltration
exfil-secret-in-urlreferences/models.md:16Credential passed in a URL query string (normal for some APIs — verify the host is the intended service) (destination is a well-known publishing service; quoted — discussed, not commanded)curl -s "https://generativelanguage.googleapis.com/v1beta/models?key=…" | grep '"name"'
known servicequoted -
low Exfiltration
net-credential-usereferences/models.md:16Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service) (destination is a well-known publishing service)curl -s "https://generativelanguage.googleapis.com/v1beta/models?key=…" | grep '"name"'
known service
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 67): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 8 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2180 tokens
- low 10 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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 392: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 12 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 8 items
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.