SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC npm-trusted-publishing

Set up or fix npm trusted publishing (OIDC) in GitHub Actions and remove NPM_TOKEN. Use for ENEEDAUTH, E404 on PUT, E422 repository.url, or migrating off 2FA-bypass tokens before January 2027.

The skillemall take

This skill sets up OIDC authentication for npm in GitHub Actions—a replacement for the deprecated NPM_TOKEN. Promises to fix ENEEDAUTH, E404 on PUT, and E422 with repository.url, plus guidance for migrating from legacy tokens before January 2027.

One file, 1243 body tokens. Scores: quality 84, process 53, safety 100. No critical findings, linter passes. Models weren't run, sandbox didn't test it. Skill works across all major platforms—Claude, DeepSeek, Cursor, and others.

If you've hit authentication errors publishing to npm or need to ditch tokens before the deadline, install it. The setup is ready, security checks out. Process documentation could be deeper, but acceptable for a workflow skill.

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github 1 file body ≈ 1 243 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 4 d ago

Set up or fix npm trusted publishing (OIDC) in GitHub Actions and remove NPMTOKEN.

As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

ProcedureGitHubSoftware developmenttype 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
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
53/100
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 · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 1. 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
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 35 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (node) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 100Steps. 22 steps
    • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1243 tokens
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    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 192: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 8 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.