backend-security-coder

Expert in secure backend coding practices specializing in input validation, authentication, and API security. Use PROACTIVELY for backend security implementations or security code reviews.

Quality

51%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/backend-security-coder/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

35%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content reads as an agent-persona document heavy on descriptive capability lists and light on executable guidance. It needs concrete code/checklists and validation steps, plus actual bundle files to back the progressive-disclosure reference.

Suggestions

Replace descriptive capability lists with concrete, executable guidance (code snippets, commands, or specific checklists) for the most common tasks.

Add validation/verification checkpoints and feedback loops to the Response Approach workflow, especially for destructive or batch security changes.

Move the bulk capability content into real reference files under references/ and ensure the cited 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' exists, or remove the broken reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is padded with long enumerated capability lists, a 'Knowledge Base' restating OWASP Top 10 and other concepts Claude already knows, and redundant Purpose/Behavioral-Traits sections.	2 / 5
Actionability	Instructions are high-level ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes') and capabilities are descriptive rather than instructive; no executable code, commands, or concrete checklists, and the lone file reference points to a non-existent path.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 'Response Approach' provides a 9-step sequence but lacks validation checkpoints, feedback loops, or concrete verification steps.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section structure exists and one inline reference is signaled, but ~70 lines of capability content are inlined in SKILL.md rather than split into bundle files, and the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' does not exist.	3 / 5
	Total	10 / 20 Passed

Description

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is well-structured with an explicit what-and-when pairing and a clear security niche. It could improve by broadening natural trigger terms and sharpening the distinction from auditor-type skills.

Suggestions

Add concrete natural trigger phrases users would say (e.g., 'when the user asks to fix a vulnerability, harden an API, or implement authentication').

Broaden trigger terms with common synonyms like 'vulnerability fix', 'secure API', and 'auth' to improve discovery.

Sharpen the distinction from security-auditor skills by emphasizing hands-on code implementation over review.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the security domain plus concrete sub-domains ('input validation, authentication, and API security') and two action types ('backend security implementations or security code reviews'), with minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly states both what ('Expert in secure backend coding practices specializing in...') and when ('Use PROACTIVELY for backend security implementations or security code reviews'), though the trigger phrasing is somewhat broad.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant phrases like 'security code reviews' and 'backend security implementations', but misses common natural variations such as 'vulnerability fix', 'secure API', or 'auth'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'secure backend coding' niche is mostly distinct, though 'security code reviews' creates minor overlap with security-auditor skills.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
Path: skills/backend-security-coder/SKILL.md
Commit: b1aebac

Reviewed: ~18 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.