file-security-toolkit

Encrypt/decrypt local files, redact sensitive information in documents, and validate password strength when handling private data or preparing files for sharing.

Quality

70%

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 ./scientific-skills/Other/file-security-toolkit/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

61%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 body is highly actionable with complete command examples and a clean single-script bundle reference, but it is dragged down by a redundant templated preamble and the absence of validation checkpoints for its destructive/batch operations.

Suggestions

Delete the generic templated 'When to Use / Key Features / Dependencies / Example Usage / Implementation Details' preamble and the hardcoded dated cd path; keep only the detailed numbered sections.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint to the run plan for destructive/batch commands, e.g. after redact verify the output file opens and spot-check masked content, and after decrypt verify the round-trip restored the original.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body opens with an entirely redundant templated block (generic 'When to Use/Key Features/Dependencies/Example Usage/Implementation Details' with fluff like 'a others task needs a packaged method instead of ad-hoc freeform output') that duplicates the detailed numbered sections below, plus a hardcoded date path and a self-contradicting dependencies note.	2 / 5
Actionability	Every subcommand (check-password, file-encrypt/decrypt, zip-encrypt/decrypt, redact) is shown with full, copy-paste-ready invocations and arguments, matching the 'fully executable; specific examples cover common cases' anchor.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The run plan lists a sequence but has no validation/verification checkpoint for destructive/batch operations (encryption, redaction that overwrites documents), so it is capped at 3 per the rubric's destructive-operation rule.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Structure is reasonable and the single bundle file scripts/file_security.py is consistently and clearly referenced with no nested multi-level references; the duplicate templated section is the main organization gap keeping it below 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

78%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 is specific, third-person, and clearly states both what the skill does and when to use it, with low conflict risk. It falls just short of top marks on trigger richness and completeness because it omits synonyms and file extensions that would make the 'when' triggers more concrete.

Suggestions

Add file extensions and synonyms to the trigger terms (e.g., 'password-protected ZIP', '.docx/.pptx', 'PII') to lift trigger_term_quality and completeness toward 5.

Make the 'when' clause more explicit with concrete user-mention triggers, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to share files safely, redact PII from documents, or check a password before encryption.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists three concrete actions ('Encrypt/decrypt local files', 'redact sensitive information in documents', 'validate password strength'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor rather than the 4-action, extension-specific 5 anchor.	4 / 5
Completeness	Answers both 'what' (encrypt/decrypt, redact, validate password) and 'when' ('when handling private data or preparing files for sharing'), but the 'when' trigger is less concrete than the 5 anchor's user-mentions-list.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Good natural-term coverage ('encrypt/decrypt', 'redact sensitive information', 'password strength', 'private data', 'preparing files for sharing'), but missing synonyms and file extensions like the 5 anchor requires ('.pdf', 'PDFs').	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear niche (file encryption/redaction/password validation) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with unrelated skills, matching the 5 anchor.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 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: aipoch/medical-research-skills
Path: scientific-skills/Other/file-security-toolkit/SKILL.md
Commit: 63c61d3

Reviewed: 8 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.