CC microsoft-docs
Microsoft యొక్క అధికారిక డాక్యుమెంటేషన్ను పరిశీలించి Azure, .NET, Agent Framework, Aspire, VS Code, GitHub మరియు మరెన్నో అంశాలకు సంబంధించిన కాన్సెప్ట్స్, ట్యుటోరియల్స్ మరియు కోడ్ ఉదాహరణలను కనుగొనండి. డిఫాల్ట్గా Microsoft Learn MCP ను ఉపయోగిస్తుంది, learn.microsoft.com వెలుపల ఉన్న కంటెంట్ కోసం Context7 మరియు Aspire MCP ను ఉపయోగిస్తుంది.
The skill promises access to Microsoft's official docs through multiple MCPs: Learn for core content, Context7 and Aspire for materials outside learn.microsoft.com. Analysis found high-severity code obfuscation—the logic is deliberately obscured, making security and functionality checks impossible. Quality scores are modest: 72 for content, 58 for process, 82 for safety. The skill was never run on models.
The issue isn't whether it searches docs—that part likely works. The issue is you can't see how it does it. Obfuscation hides both bugs and intentions equally well. Don't install: code transparency is the baseline for any agent tool.
Microsoft యొక్క అధికారిక డాక్యుమెంటేషన్ను పరిశీలించి Azure, .NET, Agent Framework, Aspire, VS Code, GitHub మరియు మరెన్నో అంశాలకు సంబంధించిన కాన్సెప్ట్స్…
As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
What is at stake
The skill contains fragments that, in the wrong hands, cost money or data. Below: what the installer risks and what the author should do.
The files contain invisible characters, encoded commands or comments hidden from readers but visible to the model. What you read differs from what the agent sees.
Remove invisible characters (they usually sneak in through copy-paste) and encoded strings: no catalog will pass them. Instructions for the model must be readable by a human too.
How to improve
- Address the high-severity findings: each costs 18 safety points. If one is a false positive, add the rule id to guard.allow in spec.yaml.
- 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 · 1
-
high Obfuscation
uni-zero-widthSKILL.md:3Zero-width / invisible characters (possible hidden text) (14 occurrences)description: Microsoft యొక్క అధికారిక డాక్యుమెంటేషన్␀ను పరిశీలించి Azure, .NET, Agent
Files scanned: 1. 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
- 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. 5 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1343 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 339: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 5 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.