Content
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is extremely terse — essentially just a command menu with no substance behind it. While conciseness is good, the skill fails to provide any actionable guidance on how the scanner works, what patterns it detects, what output looks like, or how to interpret results. A security-focused tool especially needs clear workflows with validation steps and examples of dangerous vs. safe patterns.
Suggestions
Add concrete examples for each command showing sample input and expected output (e.g., a code snippet with a malicious pattern and the scanner's response).
Define what malicious patterns the scanner detects (e.g., reentrancy, approval exploits, honeypot patterns) with specific code examples.
Add a workflow for transaction validation that includes validation checkpoints and guidance on how to handle flagged transactions (approve, reject, investigate further).
Include references to supporting files for known scam address databases, detection pattern details, and chain-specific behavior.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Very lean — just a title, one-line description, and a command reference table. No unnecessary explanations or padding. Every token earns its place. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill only lists command signatures with brief descriptions but provides zero concrete guidance on what the commands actually do, how they work, what output to expect, what patterns are detected, or how to handle results. There are no examples, no code, and no executable instructions. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no workflow, no sequencing of steps, and no validation or feedback loops. For a security scanner that could involve destructive or high-stakes decisions (e.g., transaction validation), there are no checkpoints or error-handling guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is short and organized with a clear command table, but there are no references to any supporting files for details on scan patterns, known scam databases, chain-specific behavior, or advanced usage. The brevity here feels like missing content rather than intentional progressive disclosure. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |