BC intercepting-mobile-traffic-with-burpsuite
Intercepts and analyzes HTTP/HTTPS traffic from mobile applications using Burp Suite proxy to identify insecure API communications, authentication flaws, data leakage, and server-side vulnerabilities. Use when performing mobile application penetration testing, assessing API security, or evaluating client-server communication patterns. Activates for requests involving mobile traffic interception, Burp Suite mobile proxy, API security testing, or mobile HTTPS analysis.
Intercepts and analyzes HTTP/HTTPS traffic from mobile applications using Burp Suite proxy to identify insecure API communications, authentication flaws, data…
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, 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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/workflows.md:58Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)[Test privilege escalation]
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:6Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)penetration testing, assessing API security, or evaluating client-server communication
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 "nist_csf" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "mitre_attack"
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 24 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1576 tokens
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
- +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
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 471: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 24 items
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 79.