regex-vs-llm-structured-text
Decision framework for choosing between regex and LLM when parsing structured text — start with regex, add LLM only for low-confidence edge cases.
56
65%
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
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./skills/regex-vs-llm-structured-text/SKILL.mdLow
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
The required workflow feeds the runtime “Source Text” (`content`) into the LLM via `validate_with_llm()` when confidence is low, and that source text is not guaranteed to be authored by the operating user (it could be outsider-provided document text), creating an indirect prompt-injection path through `messages.create(... "Text: {original_text}")`.
- Repository
- affaan-m/ECC
- Commit
d8409a4
- 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.