binary-analysis-patterns

Comprehensive patterns and techniques for analyzing compiled binaries, understanding assembly code, and reconstructing program logic.

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/binary-analysis-patterns/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is binary-analysis-patterns in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Quality

Content

38%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.

The skill body is a lengthy inline pattern reference that largely restates assembly knowledge Claude already has, with a decent workflow outline but no validation checkpoints and a broken external reference. It needs to be slimmed down and reorganized into supporting files.

Suggestions

Move the bulk assembly/IDA/Ghidra pattern catalog into separate reference files (e.g., references/asm-patterns.md, references/tool-scripts.md) and keep SKILL.md as a terse overview with one-level-deep links.

Fix or remove the nonexistent 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' reference, and align the directory name with the bundle convention.

Add explicit validation/checkpoint steps to the analysis workflow (e.g., verify reconstructed types compile, cross-check recovered signatures against cross-references) and make the 'Instructions' section concrete rather than generic.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is a 400+ line inline catalog of well-known material (prologue/epilogue, calling conventions, basic loop/switch assembly, LEA multiply tricks) that Claude already knows, making it noticeably verbose and padded.	2 / 5
Actionability	Real Ghidra/IDAPython snippets and assembly sequences provide concrete guidance, but many examples use symbolic placeholders ('[a]', '[n]') and the 'Instructions' section is vague ('apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes').	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 7-step 'Analysis Workflow' sequence is present, but it lacks validation checkpoints or feedback loops and only vaguely says to 'validate outcomes'.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	A large reference catalog that belongs in separate files is inlined into SKILL.md, and the single external reference ('resources/implementation-playbook.md') points to a path that does not exist.	2 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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.

The description clearly states what the skill covers but entirely omits when to use it, and relies on fairly high-level action verbs rather than concrete operations. It is reasonably distinct as a niche but lacks the natural trigger terms users would most likely say.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when ...' clause naming concrete trigger situations (e.g., reverse engineering a binary, disassembling a function, recovering types from assembly).

Include natural user terms and synonyms such as 'reverse engineering', 'disassembly', 'decompilation', and binary formats like ELF/PE.

Replace 'Comprehensive patterns and techniques' padding with specific operations like 'identify calling conventions, recover variables and types, map control flow'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain plus three action areas ('analyzing compiled binaries', 'understanding assembly code', 'reconstructing program logic'), but the actions are domain-level rather than operation-level and padded with 'Comprehensive patterns and techniques'.	3 / 5
Completeness	The 'what' is clearly stated but there is no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the rubric guidelines.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes 'binary analysis', 'compiled binaries', and 'assembly code' but omits the most natural user synonyms like 'reverse engineering', 'disassembly', and 'decompilation'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The binary/assembly scope carves a mostly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against generic code-analysis skills, though the absence of explicit trigger phrases keeps it from a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/binary-analysis-patterns/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 24 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.