CC reflection-coach
Reflect on another agent's recent execution record and propose the smallest durable instruction, skill, or tool-description change. Use for evidence-backed coaching proposals, never hot-swaps.
Reflect on another agent's recent execution record and propose the smallest durable instruction, skill, or tool-description change.
As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — References files that are not bundled: /PAP/issues/PAP-NNN, /PAP/issues/PAP-MMM, /PAP/issues/PAP-XXX
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".
If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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
-
medium Exfiltration
net-credential-useSKILL.md:80Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service)curl -sS "$PAPERCLIP_API_URL/api/issues/<issueId>" -H "Authorization: Bearer $PAPERCLIP_API_KEY"
-
medium Exfiltration
net-credential-useSKILL.md:81Credential used in a network call (verify the destination is the intended service)curl -sS "$PAPERCLIP_API_URL/api/issues/<issueId>/comments" -H "Authorization: Bearer $PAPERCLIP_API_KEY"
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: /PAP/issues/PAP-NNN - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: /PAP/issues/PAP-MMM - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: /PAP/issues/PAP-XXX - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: /PAP/issues/PAP-YYY - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "key" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "recommendedForRoles"
Process rating: all ten parameters 58/100
- 0Tools and files. 4 referenced file(s) missing: /PAP/issues/PAP-NNN, /PAP/issues/PAP-MMM, /PAP/issues/PAP-XXX
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 60 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2877 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low The response is described with custom markup (8 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 192: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 60 items
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 70.