AC smtp-penetration-testing
Conduct comprehensive security assessments of SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) servers to identify vulnerabilities including open relays, user enumeration, weak authentication, and misconfiguration.
Conduct comprehensive security assessments of SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) servers to identify vulnerabilities including open relays, user…
As a process C 60/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches
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 · 3
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 3
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/detailed-guide.md:1Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# SMTP Penetration Testing - Detailed Guide
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/detailed-guide.md:354Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)| Brute Force Blocked | Rate limiting/lockout | Slow down (`hydra -W 5`); use password spraying; check for fail2ban |
detector -
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:26Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)# SMTP Penetration Testing
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 "date_added"
Process rating: all ten parameters 60/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 29 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1312 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- 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 202: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 17 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.