SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC audit-integrity

Enforce output quality, evidence verification, and quality gates across security audits. Use this skill when you perform SAST, SCA, threat modeling, or security code reviews. Use this skill to verify code locations and taint traces for all findings. Use this skill to prevent the suppression of valid security findings. Use this skill to evaluate reports against quality thresholds (score ≥ 8/10) before delivery.

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github MIT 8 files body ≈ 881 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Enforce output quality, evidence verification, and quality gates across security audits.

As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSoftware developmentData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: GitHub Copilot / VS Code Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
85
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
58/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    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-security references/anti-rationalization-guard.md:30
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (documentation table row)
      | "Lateral movement is unlikely here"            | Document the specific architectural control that prevents pivoting and verify that it is implemented.    |
      table

    Files scanned: 8. 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 58/100

    • 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
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 11 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 881 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

    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
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 413: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 4 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 11 items
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (7 of 7)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.