FB lore
SpecStory Lore - mine your SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more) into a persistent corpus, surface your reproducible workflows with corroborated evidence, and interactively forge the chosen ones into skills installed across all your agent harnesses. Use when the user wants to turn past AI coding sessions into reusable skills, asks "what could I make into a skill", "mine my lore", "forge skills from my history", or points at a .specstory/history directory.
SpecStory Lore - mine your SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more) into a persistent corpus, surface your…
As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, execution cost, running it twice
What is at stake
The skill contains fragments that, in the wrong hands, cost money or data. Below: what the installer risks and what the author should do.
The files contain someone else's key or token. If it is live, your agent will call third-party services under a stranger's identity; if it was revoked, the skill's scripts simply fail. Such a key often arrives with the author's whole workspace, personal data included.
The key is visible to everyone who downloaded the skill and has likely been copied by catalog-scanning bots already. Revoke it now, check bills and access logs, then reissue.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- Remove the critical guard findings (secrets, dangerous commands, hidden instructions): while they stand the skill is blocked and cannot grade above F.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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 · 8
-
critical Secrets in code
secret-github-tokenscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:187GitHub token// ghp_…B4a GitHub token (ghp_/gho_/ghu_/ghs_/ghr_)
Medium and low: 7
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Bash Read Write AskUserQuestion
-
low Secrets in code
secret-aws-keyscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:186AWS access key ID (placeholder value)// AKIA…PLE AWS access key id
placeholder -
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:187High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)// ghp_…B4a GitHub token (ghp_/gho_/ghu_/ghs_/ghr_)
-
low Secrets in code
secret-slack-tokenscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:189Slack token (placeholder value)// xoxb…hij Slack token
placeholder -
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:191High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (placeholder value)// AIza…stu Google API key
placeholder -
low Secrets in code
secret-google-keyscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:191Google API key (placeholder value)// AIza…stu Google API key
placeholder -
low Secrets in code
secret-password-literalscripts/lib/patterns.mjs:194Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example)// API_KEY=hunt…er2 / "token": "abc12345" assignment with a secret-named key
Files scanned: 22. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 8152 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 190, 326): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 66/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 8152 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 11 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low The response is described with custom markup (46 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 507: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 25 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 11 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
- +3All 3 scripts are documented
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.