AC threat-radar — Continuous Security Scanning & CVE Alerting
Continuous security posture monitoring that scans your running services, Docker images, and software dependencies for known CVEs. Alerts you via WhatsApp/Telegram/Discord when new vulnerabilities a...
Continuous security posture monitoring that scans your running services, Docker images, and software dependencies for known CVEs.
As a process C 52/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, consistency
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 · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
name-formatname should be kebab-case (lowercase letters, digits, hyphens)
Process rating: all ten parameters 52/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (threat-radar — Continuous Security Scanning & CVE Alerting) differs from the folder (threat-radar)
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 85Steps. 39 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3686 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 12 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 200: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 26 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (12 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 82.