CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

graphql

GraphQL exploitation — introspection, injection, authorization bypass, and data exfiltration through GraphQL APIs.

Quality

76%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Critical

Do not install without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./packages/decepticon/decepticon/skills/standard/exploit/web/graphql/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

76%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A highly actionable, token-efficient skill with copy-paste-ready commands covering the main GraphQL attack classes. Its weakness is workflow robustness: no validation checkpoints or fallback paths (notably for disabled introspection, a common real-world case).

Suggestions

Add a feedback loop for the most common failure case: when introspection returns an error or is disabled, provide fallback steps (e.g., field-suggestion brute-forcing or clairvoyance-style attacks).

Add explicit verification checkpoints to the Workflow (e.g., confirm SQL injection with a benign marker such as a sleep/boolean test before exfiltrating data).

Consolidate the near-duplicate enumeration curl examples into one parameterized example to trim tokens.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Code-first with no concept explanations and brief, purposeful comments — near the lean anchor — but the Data Enumeration section repeats near-identical curl examples differing only in field names, and the flag/secrets queries are redundant with the general pattern, leaving minor trimming opportunities.

4 / 5

Actionability

Every example is a complete, copy-paste-ready curl or sqlmap command with explicit headers and payloads, covering discovery, introspection, enumeration, injection, and batching; schema-dependent field names are explicitly flagged for substitution.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 6-step Workflow is clearly sequenced, but all checkpoints are implicit and there is no error-recovery guidance (e.g., what to do when introspection is disabled); the batch query abuse section is a batch operation without validation, which caps workflow clarity at 3 per the rubric.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized headed sections in a self-contained ~112-line body with no bundle files; good structure overall, but it exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill threshold and the full introspection query plus per-case examples could arguably live in a reference file, leaving minor organization gaps.

4 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A concise, domain-specific description that clearly states what the skill does with multiple concrete actions. Its main weakness is the absence of explicit "when to use" trigger guidance inside the description field itself, capping completeness at 3.

Suggestions

Append an explicit trigger clause to the description, e.g. "Use when testing GraphQL endpoints, dumping schemas, or when the user mentions GraphQL, gql, or introspection" — the when-guidance currently lives only in metadata.when_to_use, capping completeness at 3.

Mention batch query abuse (a body section) and add the natural synonym "gql" to close the coverage gap in specificity and trigger terms.

Disambiguate "injection" as "SQL injection through resolvers" to reduce overlap with generic SQLi skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists four concrete actions ("introspection, injection, authorization bypass, and data exfiltration") in a named domain, matching the several-specific-actions anchor; falls short of 5 because batch query abuse — covered in the body — is omitted and "injection" does not specify SQL injection.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear and concrete, but the description field contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance — triggers live only in metadata.when_to_use — which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ("GraphQL exploitation", "introspection", "authorization bypass", "data exfiltration", "GraphQL APIs"), but common synonyms such as "gql" or "schema dump" are missing from the description, so it does not reach comprehensive synonym coverage.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"GraphQL exploitation" is a clear niche with GraphQL-specific triggers, but the generic terms "injection" and "authorization bypass" create minor overlap risk with general SQL-injection and web-exploitation skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

PurpleAILAB/Decepticon

Path

packages/decepticon/decepticon/skills/standard/exploit/web/graphql/SKILL.md

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.