AD create-threat-model
Analyze a codebase and produce a structured threat model at .turbo/threat-model.md covering assets, trust boundaries, attack surfaces with existing mitigations, attacker stories, and calibrated severity. Use when the user asks to "create a threat model", "threat model", "threat model this codebase", "security analysis", "analyze the attack surface", "what are the threats", or "identify security risks".
Analyze a codebase and produce a structured threat model at .turbo/threat-model.md covering assets, trust boundaries, attack surfaces with existing…
As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
The same skill appears in 1 more place: turbo
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securityreferences/analysis-guide.md:68Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **Installer/setup**: privilege escalation during installation, fixed vs user-controlled paths
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:106Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- **High**: Significant compromise requiring specific preconditions. Privilege escalation, targeted data theft, bypassing a major security control, integration compromise.
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 30Running it twice. 6 mutating operations with no state check
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 43 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2426 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 405: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 10 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 43 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 93.