rebuttal
Use when a quest already has a paper, draft, or review package and the task is to map reviewer feedback into experiments, manuscript deltas, and a durable rebuttal / revision response.
69
85%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Low
Low-risk findings.
1 low severity finding. Worth noting, but not necessarily harmful.
W011: Third-party content exposure detected (indirect prompt injection risk).
What this means
The skill exposes the agent to untrusted, user-generated content from public third-party sources, creating a risk of indirect prompt injection. This includes browsing arbitrary URLs, reading social media posts or forum comments, and analyzing content from unknown websites.
Why it was flagged
Yes—SKILL.md requires normalizing the review package (including “review comments, meta-review, or editor letter” and inputs that can come from “URLs, local file paths, local directories, or current-turn attachments”), and step 1 explicitly ingests “reviewer wording or a source-faithful clipped quote” into the agent’s durable artifacts, which then feed the LLM’s subsequent planning/response generation context (classic indirect prompt-injection via reviewer-supplied free text).
- Repository
- ResearAI/DeepScientist
- Commit
b366244
- Audited
- Security analysis
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.