pt-embedded-device-assessment
Performs authorized security assessment of embedded and IoT devices across hardware, firmware, interfaces, and update mechanisms. Use when testing device boot flows, debug interfaces, firmware integrity, and local/network attack surfaces.
88
82%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
99%
1.12xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
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 a well-crafted skill description that clearly defines its scope (embedded/IoT security assessment), lists specific capabilities across multiple domains, and provides explicit trigger conditions. It uses appropriate third-person voice and includes natural terminology that security professionals would use, making it highly distinguishable from other security-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions and domains: 'security assessment of embedded and IoT devices across hardware, firmware, interfaces, and update mechanisms' plus specific areas like 'boot flows, debug interfaces, firmware integrity, and local/network attack surfaces.' | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (performs authorized security assessment of embedded and IoT devices across hardware, firmware, interfaces, and update mechanisms) and 'when' (Use when testing device boot flows, debug interfaces, firmware integrity, and local/network attack surfaces). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'security assessment', 'embedded', 'IoT devices', 'hardware', 'firmware', 'debug interfaces', 'boot flows', 'attack surfaces', 'update mechanisms'. These cover the vocabulary a security professional would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche targeting embedded/IoT device security specifically, with clear triggers around hardware, firmware, boot flows, and debug interfaces that are unlikely to conflict with general security or software testing skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The skill is well-structured and concise, appropriately scoping an embedded device security assessment without over-explaining concepts Claude already knows. However, it lacks concrete, executable guidance (specific tools, commands, or example outputs) and misses explicit validation checkpoints in a workflow that involves potentially destructive hardware operations. Adding tool-specific examples and feedback loops would significantly improve its practical utility.
Suggestions
Add concrete tool commands and examples for key steps (e.g., `binwalk -e firmware.bin` for extraction, `openocd -f interface/jlink.cfg` for JTAG access, specific commands for UART interaction).
Insert explicit validation checkpoints in the workflow, such as 'Verify recovery procedure works before proceeding to firmware extraction' and 'Confirm device is in known-good state before runtime testing'.
Consider referencing separate methodology files for deep-dive topics (e.g., FIRMWARE_ANALYSIS.md, HARDWARE_INTERFACES.md) to keep the overview lean while providing detailed guidance where needed.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and well-structured. It avoids explaining what embedded devices or IoT are, assumes Claude understands security concepts like JTAG/SWD/UART, and every section earns its place without padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides a structured workflow and output template, but guidance remains at the checklist/description level rather than providing concrete commands, tool invocations, or executable examples. For instance, 'firmware extraction and integrity validation' lacks specific tools or commands (e.g., binwalk, openocd commands, etc.). | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are logically sequenced from environment setup through remediation, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops between steps. For a security assessment involving potentially destructive hardware interactions, the absence of verify-before-proceeding gates and error recovery steps is a notable gap. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is reasonably organized with clear sections and an output template, but everything is inline in a single file. For a multi-domain assessment covering hardware, firmware, runtime, and updates, references to deeper methodology guides or tool-specific documentation would improve navigation and keep the overview concise. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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
- santosomar/ethical-hacking-agent-skills
- Commit
9976e81
- 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.