AB frontend-security-coder
Expert in secure frontend coding practices specializing in XSS prevention, output sanitization, and client-side security patterns. Use PROACTIVELY for frontend security implementations or client-side security code reviews.
Expert in secure frontend coding practices specializing in XSS prevention, output sanitization, and client-side security patterns.
As a process B 75/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: running it twice, progress reporting
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
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:35Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Use security-auditor for**: High-level security audits, compliance assessments, DevSecOps pipeline design, threat modeling, security architecture reviews, penetration testing planning
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 75/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 5 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 113 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2812 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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 222: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 21 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 113 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (0 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.