BB paperzilla
Use the Paperzilla CLI (pz) to browse research projects and feeds, inspect canonical papers and project recommendations, leave feedback, export JSON, and generate Atom feed URLs. Trigger when users ask to check Paperzilla feeds, list projects, inspect paper details, tune recommendations, or automate feed workflows.
As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, progress reporting
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 contains commands that delete files, rewrite disks or execute code fetched from the network. The agent may run them without asking if it believes the instructions require it.
Replace destructive commands with safe equivalents that ask for confirmation, scope them to one folder, and stop piping curl into a shell: pin a version and a checksum.
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 · 3
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 3
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:31Privilege escalation / world-writable permissionssudo mv pz /usr/local/bin/
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:87Privilege escalation / world-writable permissionssudo mv pz /usr/local/bin/
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:94Privilege escalation / world-writable permissionssudo mv pz /usr/local/bin/
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "homepage"
Process rating: all ten parameters 65/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 65Failures and branches. 3 branches
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 23 steps, 2 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1138 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 316: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 25 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 23 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (22 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.