CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

reentrancy

Hunt and validate reentrancy bugs — classic cross-function, same-function, read-only, and cross-contract variants.

67

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

93%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 tight, actionable playbook with executable Foundry/tooling commands, a clear audit workflow, and a success criterion that acts as a validation checkpoint; the only gap is an explicit error-recovery feedback loop.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean (~40 lines) with no padding or re-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every section (variants, audit steps, PoC, CVSS, exemplars) earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Provides copy-paste-ready, specific commands such as `solidity_scan_file`, `foundry_reentrancy_test(target="Vault", function="withdraw", target_path="src/Vault.sol")`, and `forge test -vvv --match-contract Test_withdraw`, plus concrete per-hit checks.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered audit sequence (scan -> per-hit checks -> call-graph trace -> PoC) with an explicit success criterion as the validation checkpoint, but no explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loop is spelled out.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines, no bundle files present, and content is organized into well-signaled sections (Variants, Audit steps, PoC, Success criteria, CVSS, Known exemplars), meeting the simple-skill exception for a 5.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

70%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 specific, distinctive description that clearly states what the skill does and enumerates the reentrancy variants it covers, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, capping completeness.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when auditing smart contracts for reentrancy, or when the user mentions reentrancy, hooks, or checks-effects-interactions.'

Include a couple of natural synonyms/file cues (e.g. 'Solidity', '.sol', 'EVM') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain ('reentrancy bugs') and two concrete actions ('Hunt and validate') plus an enumerated list of four variant subtypes, giving several specific items with only minor coverage gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (hunt and validate reentrancy bugs and their variants), but there is no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 3.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong domain keywords a smart-contract auditor would naturally say ('reentrancy', 'cross-function', 'same-function', 'read-only', 'cross-contract'); missing a few common synonyms or a 'Use when' phrasing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Reentrancy bugs' is a sharply specific niche with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

16

/

20

Passed

Validation

87%

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

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

metadata_field

'metadata' should map string keys to string values

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
PurpleAILAB/Decepticon
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.