multi-agentic-threat-model
Comprehensive threat modeling for multi-agent systems using CSA MAESTRO 7-layer framework and OWASP Multi-Agentic System Threat Modeling Guide v1.0. Systematically analyzes threats across all architectural layers from foundation models to agent ecosystems.
56
33%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
97%
1.61xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/multi-agentic-threat-model/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
40%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description identifies a clear and distinctive niche in multi-agent system threat modeling with specific framework references, which is its strongest aspect. However, it lacks a 'Use when...' clause entirely, and the concrete actions are limited to the vague 'analyzes threats' rather than listing specific deliverables or outputs. Adding explicit trigger guidance and more concrete action verbs would significantly improve skill selection accuracy.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about threat modeling, security analysis, or risk assessment for multi-agent AI systems, agentic architectures, or LLM-based agent pipelines.'
List specific concrete actions/outputs, e.g., 'Identifies attack vectors, maps threats to architectural layers, generates threat matrices, recommends mitigations, and produces structured threat model reports.'
Include natural user trigger terms like 'AI security', 'agent vulnerabilities', 'LLM security risks', 'agentic system risks', or 'security review' to improve matching with how users naturally phrase requests.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (threat modeling for multi-agent systems) and references specific frameworks (CSA MAESTRO, OWASP), but doesn't list concrete actions beyond 'analyzes threats.' Missing specifics like 'generates threat matrices, identifies attack vectors, produces mitigation recommendations.' | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what it does (threat modeling using specific frameworks) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'when' is entirely absent, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant technical keywords like 'threat modeling', 'multi-agent systems', 'CSA MAESTRO', 'OWASP', and 'foundation models', but these are fairly specialized. Missing natural user terms like 'security analysis', 'AI security', 'agent vulnerabilities', 'LLM threats', or 'agentic security review.' | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the very specific niche of multi-agent system threat modeling with named frameworks (CSA MAESTRO 7-layer, OWASP Multi-Agentic System Threat Modeling Guide v1.0). Unlikely to conflict with other skills given this narrow domain. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
27%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill reads more like a high-level methodology overview than actionable guidance for Claude. It describes what to analyze at each MAESTRO layer but never shows how — no example threats, no sample findings, no concrete output formats, and no validation steps. The referenced template file is missing from the bundle, and the dense content would benefit significantly from progressive disclosure into supporting files.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete example threat finding per layer (or for 2-3 representative layers) showing the expected output format, severity rating, and mitigation recommendation.
Provide the referenced 'templates/finding.md' in the bundle, or inline a concrete finding template with specific fields and an example populated entry.
Add validation checkpoints such as: 'Verify all 7 layers are mapped before proceeding to threat analysis' and 'Cross-reference identified threats against OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications to ensure coverage.'
Split detailed layer-specific threat catalogs and extended multi-agent threat descriptions into separate reference files (e.g., 'layers/layer1-threats.md') and keep SKILL.md as a concise workflow overview with navigation links.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably structured but includes some explanatory padding (e.g., defining what each MAESTRO layer is when Claude could look this up). The layer descriptions add some value as a reference but could be more terse. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill is entirely abstract and descriptive — it lists categories of analysis to perform but provides no concrete examples, templates, executable commands, or sample outputs. There's no example threat finding, no sample architecture map, and the referenced 'templates/finding.md' is not provided in the bundle. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are numbered and sequenced logically (map architecture → analyze per layer → cross-layer → extended threats → patterns → mitigations), but there are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops, and no guidance on what to do when analysis is incomplete or when threats are ambiguous. For a complex multi-step analytical process, explicit checkpoints are missing. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references 'templates/finding.md' but no bundle files are provided, making this a broken reference. All content is monolithically inline with no separation of the detailed layer definitions, threat taxonomies, or examples into supporting files. For a comprehensive framework covering 7 layers plus extensions, this needs much better structural organization. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- OWASP/secure-agent-playbook
- Commit
3f4fcb6
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.