CD citation-crosscheck
Conditionally double-blind bibliographic cross-check (double-blind only when the host can isolate the web agent; a flag-only heuristic when isolation can't be attested): one agent extracts each cited entry verbatim from the local .bib, a second independently re-fetches the same paper's record from the web while blind to the .bib, and a third extractor emits a mechanical field-by-field delta to catch dropped/re-ordered authors, wrong years, wrong venues, and bad DOIs/arXiv ids. The main agent (never a shard) assigns the MATCH/MINOR/MISMATCH verdict per reference, and exports a side-by-side spreadsheet. Use when user says "citation crosscheck", "double-blind citation check", "verify bib against scholar", "bib field audit", "引用交叉核对", or before submission when bibliography FIELD accuracy (not just existence) must be certified.
Conditionally double-blind bibliographic cross-check (double-blind only when the host can isolate the web agent; a flag-only heuristic when isolation can't be…
As a process D 41/100 · Unfinished process — References files that are not bundled: ../shared-references/external-cadence.md, ../shared-references/fan-out-pattern.md, ../shared-references/acceptance-gate.md
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
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
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bash(*)allowed-tools: Bash(*) Read Grep Glob Write WebFetch WebSearch
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 9375 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../shared-references/external-cadence.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../shared-references/fan-out-pattern.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../shared-references/acceptance-gate.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../shared-references/integration-contract.md - note
edit-residuethe text marks something as outdated (lines 387): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions
Process rating: all ten parameters 41/100
- 0Tools and files. 4 referenced file(s) missing: ../shared-references/external-cadence.md, ../shared-references/fan-out-pattern.md, ../shared-references/acceptance-gate.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 17 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 40Execution cost. Instruction body is 9375 tokens: crowds the task out of the window
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 85Steps. 23 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 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 (3 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)
- +3Description length 834: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 23 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 67.