BC ops-maintenance
运维助手 v3.3.10 - 本地/远程/集群监控 (健康检查、日志分析、性能监控、批量操作、密码过期检查、告警通知、定时巡检、Docker健康、SSL证书、安全审计、网络诊断)
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
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 instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".
If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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
-
medium Exfiltration
exfil-read-secret-filesdist/core/usecases/PasswordCheckUseCase.js:48Reads credential / secret files (quoted — discussed, not commanded)const usersOutput = await this.ssh.execute(server, 'cat /etc/shadow 2>/dev/null | cut -d: -f1 | grep -v "^[$!*]$" | head -20');
quoted -
low Secrets in code
secret-password-literaldist/config/validator.js:18Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example)password: zod_…ing().optional(),
-
low Secrets in code
secret-password-literalSKILL.md:119Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example)- password: 远程密码过期检查(v3.3.8新增)
Files scanned: 80. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "userInvocable" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "argumentHint" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "allowedTools"
Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100
- 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
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 85 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1598 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- low 16 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)
- +3Description length 89: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -221 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 64 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 85 items
- +4Has examples (31 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 64.