SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BB audit-skills

Expert security auditor for AI Skills and Bundles. Performs non-intrusive static analysis to identify malicious patterns, data leaks, system stability risks, and obfuscated payloads across Windows, macOS, Linux/Unix, and Mobile (Android/iOS).

sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills Hermes author: sickn33 MIT 1 file body ≈ 1 429 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 25 h ago

Expert security auditor for AI Skills and Bundles.

As a process B 70/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, failures and branches, running it twice

AnalyzerSecuritytype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code Hermes Agent
JSON
Technical rating
B
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
97
Quality 40%
75
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
70/100
Nearly there
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. For Hermes the description must be one sentence under 60 characters; move the conditions to a "When to Use" section.
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 · 3

✓ No critical or high findings

Medium and low: 3
  • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:108
    Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
    - ✅ Check for privilege escalation patterns

A further 2 matches are quotations in this security skill's documentation and are not counted as findings.

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

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-long-hermes description is 242 chars; the Hermes authoring standard requires ≤ 60 (one sentence, ending with a period)
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "risk"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "source"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "date_added"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "tools"
  • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 37): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

Process rating: all ten parameters 70/100

  • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
  • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
  • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
  • 100Steps. 50 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1429 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
  • +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 242: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 23 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 50 items
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.