iam-policy-reviewer
Iam Policy Reviewer - Auto-activating skill for Security Advanced. Triggers on: iam policy reviewer, iam policy reviewer Part of the Security Advanced skill category.
32
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
92%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/04-security-advanced/iam-policy-reviewer/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 essentially a placeholder with no substantive content. It merely repeats the skill name and category without describing any concrete capabilities, use cases, or trigger conditions. It would be nearly useless for Claude to select this skill appropriately from a pool of available skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Reviews AWS IAM policies for overly permissive access, identifies privilege escalation risks, checks for least-privilege compliance, and suggests policy tightening.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about IAM policy review, AWS permissions audit, access control analysis, least privilege checks, or security policy compliance.'
Include platform-specific keywords (AWS, GCP, Azure) and common variations users would say, such as 'IAM roles', 'policy permissions', 'access review', 'privilege escalation', 'security posture'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. It only states the skill name and category ('IAM Policy Reviewer', 'Security Advanced') without describing what it actually does—no mention of reviewing, analyzing, auditing, or any specific capabilities. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. There is no explanation of capabilities and no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'iam policy reviewer' repeated twice. There are no natural user keywords like 'IAM policy', 'permissions', 'access control', 'AWS policy', 'least privilege', 'security audit', or other terms a user would naturally use. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is too vague to be distinctive. 'Security Advanced' is generic, and without specifying what kind of IAM policies (AWS, GCP, Azure), what actions are performed, or what differentiates it from other security-related skills, it could easily conflict with other security skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an empty placeholder with no actual content about IAM policy review. It contains only auto-generated boilerplate that repeats the skill name without providing any actionable guidance, security review criteria, code examples, or workflow steps. It would be completely unhelpful for Claude in performing IAM policy reviews.
Suggestions
Add concrete IAM policy review steps: parse the policy JSON, check for wildcard actions/resources, verify least-privilege principle, flag overly permissive trust relationships, and validate condition keys.
Include executable code examples showing how to analyze IAM policies programmatically (e.g., using AWS CLI commands like `aws iam get-policy-version` or Python boto3 snippets to enumerate and evaluate policies).
Add a checklist of common IAM policy anti-patterns to flag (e.g., `"Action": "*"`, `"Resource": "*"`, missing condition blocks, overly broad AssumeRole trust policies) with specific examples of bad vs. good policies.
Define a clear review workflow with validation checkpoints: 1) Collect policies, 2) Parse and normalize, 3) Run checks against security rules, 4) Generate findings report with severity levels.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler with no substantive information. It explains what the skill does in abstract terms without providing any actual IAM policy review guidance, techniques, or examples. Every section restates the same vague concept. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete, executable guidance. No code, no commands, no specific IAM policy patterns, no review checklists, no examples of policy analysis. The content only describes rather than instructs. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined at all. For a security review task like IAM policy review, there should be clear steps (e.g., parse policy, check for overly permissive actions, validate least privilege, flag wildcards), but none are provided. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a flat, repetitive structure with no meaningful organization. There are no references to detailed materials, no examples, and no layered content. The sections are boilerplate headers with no real content beneath them. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
3e83543
- 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.