brakeman
Static analysis security vulnerability scanner for Ruby on Rails applications. Use when analyzing Rails code for security issues, running security audits, reviewing code for vulnerabilities, setting up security scanning in CI/CD, managing security warnings, or investigating specific vulnerability types (SQL injection, XSS, command injection, etc.). Also use when configuring Brakeman, reducing false positives, or integrating with automated workflows.
89
86%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 is an excellent skill description that clearly identifies its domain (Brakeman/Rails security scanning), lists concrete actions and use cases, and provides comprehensive trigger terms. It uses proper third-person voice, includes an explicit 'Use when...' clause with diverse scenarios, and is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with other skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: analyzing Rails code for security issues, running security audits, reviewing code for vulnerabilities, setting up security scanning in CI/CD, managing security warnings, configuring Brakeman, reducing false positives, and integrating with automated workflows. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (static analysis security vulnerability scanner for Ruby on Rails applications) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause covering multiple trigger scenarios including security audits, vulnerability types, configuration, and CI/CD integration. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'security audit', 'vulnerabilities', 'SQL injection', 'XSS', 'command injection', 'CI/CD', 'false positives', 'Brakeman', 'Rails', 'security scanning'. These are terms a developer would naturally use when seeking this kind of help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear niche: specifically targets Brakeman for Ruby on Rails security scanning. The combination of 'Rails', 'Brakeman', and specific vulnerability types makes it very unlikely to conflict with other skills like general code review or non-Rails security tools. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, comprehensive skill that provides highly actionable guidance with good progressive disclosure to reference files. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (the overview, best practices list, and warning types enumeration could be trimmed) and workflows that lack explicit validation/error-recovery steps. The decision tree is a nice touch but the actual step-by-step workflows would benefit from verification checkpoints.
Suggestions
Trim the overview paragraph, best practices list (reduce to 3-4 most non-obvious items), and warning types enumeration (just reference the file) to improve conciseness.
Add explicit validation steps to workflows, e.g., verify installation succeeded, check exit code after scan, confirm report file was generated before proceeding to comparison steps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary explanation (e.g., the overview paragraph explaining what static analysis is, listing all warning types without actionable detail, the 10-item best practices list with generic advice Claude already knows). It could be tightened significantly but isn't egregiously verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides fully executable, copy-paste ready commands throughout — installation methods, scan commands, output format flags, CI scripts, configuration YAML examples, and interactive ignore workflow with specific key bindings. Very concrete and actionable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision tree and common workflows section provide good sequencing, but the workflows lack explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops. For example, the 'Initial Security Audit' workflow doesn't verify Brakeman installed correctly or validate that the scan completed without errors before proceeding to the next step. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-structured with clear sections, and appropriately references external files (references/warning_types.md, references/command_options.md, references/reducing_false_positives.md) for detailed content. References are one level deep and clearly signaled with descriptions of what each contains. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- lucianghinda/superpowers-ruby
- Commit
cb03f92
- 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.