anti-reversing-techniques
AUTHORIZED USE ONLY: This skill contains dual-use security techniques. Before proceeding with any bypass or analysis: > 1.
25
7%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/antigravity-anti-reversing-techniques/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is fundamentally non-functional as a skill description. It reads as a truncated authorization disclaimer rather than describing what the skill does or when it should be used. It provides no concrete actions, no trigger terms, and no guidance for Claude to select it appropriately.
Suggestions
Replace the disclaimer text with a clear statement of what the skill actually does, listing specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Performs security vulnerability analysis, penetration testing guidance, and code audit reviews').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about security testing, vulnerability scanning, penetration testing, or code security audits').
If authorization context is needed, move it to the skill body rather than the description field, which should focus entirely on capability matching and trigger guidance.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions or capabilities. It mentions 'bypass or analysis' but these are vague and not tied to any specific domain or task. The text is mostly a disclaimer/warning rather than a functional description. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it.' There is no 'Use when...' clause, no explanation of capabilities, and the text appears to be a truncated disclaimer rather than a skill description. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | There are no natural keywords a user would say when needing this skill. Terms like 'dual-use security techniques' and 'AUTHORIZED USE ONLY' are not trigger terms users would naturally use in requests. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is too vague to be distinguishable from any other security-related skill. 'Bypass or analysis' could overlap with numerous security, penetration testing, or code review skills without any clear niche. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
14%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is almost entirely a policy/authorization wrapper with no substantive technical content. All actionable guidance is deferred to a referenced playbook file that doesn't exist in the bundle, leaving the skill body as a collection of vague, abstract instructions. The excessive focus on authorization disclaimers, while understandable for the domain, comes at the expense of any concrete, executable guidance.
Suggestions
Add concrete, actionable content: include specific tools (e.g., Ghidra, x64dbg, strace), commands, and example workflows for common authorized analysis tasks rather than deferring everything to a missing file.
Provide at least one complete worked example (e.g., a step-by-step malware triage workflow or a CTF binary analysis walkthrough) with specific commands and validation checkpoints.
Either include the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` in the bundle or inline the essential techniques and examples directly in the SKILL.md.
Consolidate the redundant authorization/safety sections — the preamble, 'Do not use' section, and 'Safety' section all say similar things and could be merged into a single concise block.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The authorization preamble and safety warnings are somewhat verbose and repetitive (e.g., 'authorized' appears many times). The 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections overlap with the preamble. However, given the sensitive domain, some redundancy is justified. The boilerplate 'Limitations' section adds little value. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions are entirely abstract and vague: 'Identify protection mechanisms and choose safe analysis methods' provides no concrete techniques, commands, tools, or examples. Everything actionable is deferred to a referenced file that doesn't exist in the bundle. There is nothing executable or copy-paste ready. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four numbered steps are high-level platitudes ('Confirm authorization', 'Identify protection mechanisms', 'Document findings') with no specific sequencing, validation checkpoints, or feedback loops. For a security analysis workflow involving potentially destructive or risky operations, this is critically insufficient. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references `resources/implementation-playbook.md` for all substantive content, but no bundle files are provided, meaning the reference leads nowhere. The SKILL.md itself contains no real technical content — it's essentially an empty shell pointing to a non-existent file. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- boisenoise/skills-collections
- Commit
431bfad
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.