epic-review
Authoritative protocol for pre-work review of epics. Six-stage gating chain — roadmap fit, approach elegance, source discussion mapping, sub-structure coherence, prescription layer, avoided-traps completeness — posted as a structured comment on the epic ticket. Per-agent-per-epic one-shot; subsequent sub pickups cite the prior review. Triggers: Use this skill when an agent is about to pick up its first sub from an unreviewed epic (per model-identity OTHER than the epic's author — you never review your own epic). Also use when a user explicitly requests an epic review, or when an epic is freshly filed and a reviewer pre-validates before any sub pickup begins. Participated in the source Discussion? The participant path narrows the chain; it never exempts it.
80
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Low
Low-risk findings.
1 low severity finding. Worth noting, but not necessarily harmful.
W011: Third-party content exposure detected (indirect prompt injection risk).
What this means
The skill exposes the agent to untrusted, user-generated content from public third-party sources, creating a risk of indirect prompt injection. This includes browsing arbitrary URLs, reading social media posts or forum comments, and analyzing content from unknown websites.
Why it was flagged
The required workflow at runtime pulls the live epic issue body and comment thread from GitHub (outsider-authored free text written by other contributors) via `mcp_neo-mjs-github-workflow_get_conversation` before the six-stage LLM chain, creating an indirect prompt-injection path.
- Repository
- neomjs/neo
- Commit
b4a1b58
- Audited
- Security analysis
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.