BC implementing-identity-verification-for-zero-trust
Implements continuous, risk-adaptive identity verification for zero trust using phishing-resistant MFA (FIDO2/WebAuthn), risk-based conditional access, and identity governance aligned with NIST SP 800-207 and the CISA Zero Trust Maturity Model Identity Pillar. Use when designing zero trust identity controls, deploying phishing-resistant MFA, or building conditional access policies based on device posture, behavior, and location.
Implements continuous, risk-adaptive identity verification for zero trust using phishing-resistant MFA (FIDO2/WebAuthn), risk-based conditional access, and…
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches
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: 8. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "domain" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "subdomain" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "atlas_techniques" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "nist_ai_rmf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_f3" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 114, 166): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 79 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1959 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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
- -43 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
- -32 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 432: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 79 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.