CC hunt-sharepoint
Hunt Microsoft SharePoint Server (2013/2016/2019/Subscription Edition) on-prem farms
Hunt Microsoft SharePoint Server (2013/2016/2019/Subscription Edition) on-prem farms
As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, execution cost
The same skill appears in 2 more places: agentic-awesome-skills, agentic-awesome-skills
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
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 Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:35Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)SharePoint Server (on-prem) is one of the richest enterprise attack surfaces in 2025-2026 bug bounty / red-team work. Three forces converge:
Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 8274 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "risk" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source_repo" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source_type" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "date_added" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "license_source" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "sources" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "report_count" - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 21, 57, 77, 144, 154, 332): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 8274 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 62 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (20 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)
- +3Description length 84: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 17 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 62 items
- +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.