AC security-and-hardening
Hardens code against vulnerabilities. Use when handling user input, authentication, data storage, or external integrations. Use when building any feature that accepts untrusted data, manages user sessions, or interacts with third-party services.
Hardens code against vulnerabilities.
As a process C 55/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, failures and branches, running it twice
The same skill appears in 2 more places: agentic-awesome-skills, agentic-awesome-skills
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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- 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"
Process rating: all ten parameters 55/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, node) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4796 tokens
- 100Steps. 67 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 16 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
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
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 245: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 30 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 67 items
- +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.