SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD secure-code-review

Systematically reviews code for SQL injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, cryptographic failures, and other common OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, providing vulnerable code examples and ready-to-use remediation guidance. Trigger this skill when users ask for a security review, vulnerability scan, or penetration testing assistance, or mention keywords like OWASP, SQL injection, XSS, code audit, or security checklist.

zebbern/claude-code-guide Agent Skills author: zebbern 2 files body ≈ 4 616 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

Systematically reviews code for SQL injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, cryptographic failures, and other common OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities…

As a process D 38/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSecuritySoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
97
Quality 40%
85
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
38/100
Unfinished process
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    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:3
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use) (detector / deny-list definition)
      description: "Systematically reviews code for SQL injection, XSS, SSRF, broken access control, cryptographic failures, and other common OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, providing vulnerable code examples
      detector
    • low Dangerous commands cmd-eval-dynamic SKILL.md:174
      Dynamic code execution from decoded/untrusted input (documentation of a security skill)
      os.system(f"ping -c 4 {host}")
      security skill
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:571
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      > **Note:** This checklist is a supplementary review tool and does not replace professional penetration testing. For high-security systems, combine automated scanning + manual code audit + penetration

    Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 92): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 38/100

    • 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
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Steps. 63 steps, 5 vague phrases
    • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4616 tokens
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
    • low 15 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

    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
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 424: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 38 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 63 items
    • +4Has examples (23 code blocks)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.