SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC V3 Security Overhaul

Complete security architecture overhaul for claude-flow v3. Addresses critical CVEs (CVE-1, CVE-2, CVE-3) and implements secure-by-default patterns. Use for security-first v3 implementation.

ruvnet/claude-flow Agent Skills author: ruvnet MIT 1 file body ≈ 548 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 31 h ago

Complete security architecture overhaul for claude-flow v3.

As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches

ProcedureSecuritytype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
91/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
79
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
56/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: V3 Security Overhaul (ruvnet/wifi-densepose)

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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 · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Secrets in code secret-password-literal SKILL.md:42
      Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example)
      const apiKey = crypto.randomBytes(32).toString('hex');

    Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • warning name-format name should be kebab-case (lowercase letters, digits, hyphens)

    Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100

    • 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
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (V3 Security Overhaul) differs from the folder (v3-security-overhaul)
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 4 steps
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 548 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

    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 190: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 12 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 4 items
    • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 79.