AB security-auditor
Expert security auditor specializing in DevSecOps, comprehensive cybersecurity, and compliance frameworks. Masters vulnerability assessment, threat modeling, secure authentication (OAuth2/OIDC), OWASP standards, cloud security, and security automation. Handles DevSecOps integration, compliance (GDPR/HIPAA/SOC2), and incident response. Use PROACTIVELY for security audits, DevSecOps, or compliance implementation.
Expert security auditor specializing in DevSecOps, comprehensive cybersecurity, and compliance frameworks.
As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches, running it twice
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 · 4
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 4
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:65Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)- **Vulnerability assessment**: Automated scanning, manual testing, penetration testing
detector -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:122Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Penetration testing**: Web application testing, network testing, social engineering
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:123Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Red team exercises**: Advanced persistent threat simulation, attack path analysis
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:124Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Bug bounty programs**: Program management, vulnerability triage, reward systems
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 65/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 110 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2464 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- 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 414: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 21 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 110 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (0 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 87.