BB ragflow-runbook
End-to-end runbook for deploying, operating, troubleshooting, and monitoring RAGFlow (runtime ops only).
As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, 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
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeSKILL.md:124Privilege escalation / world-writable permissionssudo chown -R "$USER" /opt
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegeexamples/troubleshooting.md:50Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (test fixture / example file)echo "vm.max_map_count=262144" | sudo tee -a /etc/sysctl.conf
fixture
Files scanned: 13. 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") - warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 5106 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "env"
Process rating: all ten parameters 66/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, git) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 5106 tokens
- 100Steps. 162 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 4 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
- low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (7 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
- +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 104: 120–800 characters recommended
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- -32 of 6 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Structure: 36 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 162 items
- +4Has examples (24 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 53.