anti-reversing-techniques
AUTHORIZED USE ONLY: This skill contains dual-use security techniques. Before proceeding with any bypass or analysis: > 1.
28
11%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/anti-reversing-techniques/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 truncated authorization disclaimer rather than a functional skill description. It provides no concrete actions, no trigger terms, and no guidance on when Claude should select this skill. It would be completely ineffective for skill selection among even a small set of available skills.
Suggestions
Replace the disclaimer text with a clear statement of what the skill does, listing specific concrete actions (e.g., 'Performs penetration testing analysis, identifies vulnerabilities in web applications, reviews security configurations').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms a user would say (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about security audits, vulnerability scanning, penetration testing, or network security analysis').
Remove the authorization preamble from the description field—disclaimers belong in the skill body, not in the description used for skill selection.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions or capabilities. It mentions 'dual-use security techniques' and 'bypass or analysis' but does not describe what the skill actually does in any specific way. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it.' There is no 'Use when...' clause, and the 'what' is entirely absent—it reads like a truncated disclaimer rather than a skill description. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | There are no natural keywords a user would say when needing this skill. Terms like 'dual-use security techniques' and 'bypass' are vague jargon without clear user-facing trigger terms. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that it could apply to any security-related skill. 'Dual-use security techniques' and 'bypass or analysis' provide no clear niche or distinct triggers to differentiate it from other skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is almost entirely a policy/authorization wrapper with no actionable technical content. The actual instructions are vague platitudes that defer everything to an external playbook, meaning the SKILL.md body provides virtually no executable guidance. While the authorization framing is appropriate for security-sensitive content, the skill fails to provide even a minimal quick-start or concrete example of what techniques or tools are involved.
Suggestions
Add concrete, actionable content to the Instructions section—specific tools (e.g., Ghidra, x64dbg, strace), commands, or at minimum a categorized overview of techniques (anti-debugging detection, unpacking, deobfuscation) with brief executable examples.
Include at least one worked example or scenario (e.g., a CTF-style walkthrough) showing the workflow from identification to analysis to documentation.
Add validation checkpoints to the workflow, such as 'Verify the binary runs in a sandboxed environment before proceeding' or 'Confirm static analysis results match dynamic behavior before reporting.'
Consolidate the repeated authorization guidance—the blockquote, 'Use this skill when', and 'Do not use this skill when' sections all say similar things and could be merged into a single concise section.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The authorization disclaimer is lengthy and repeated (once in the blockquote, again in 'Do not use this skill when'). The 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections overlap with the disclaimer. However, given the security-sensitive nature, some redundancy is justified. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions are entirely abstract and vague: 'Identify protection mechanisms and choose safe analysis methods' provides no concrete techniques, commands, tools, or examples. There is no executable guidance whatsoever—everything is deferred to an external playbook. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The four numbered steps are high-level platitudes ('Confirm authorization', 'Identify protection mechanisms', 'Document findings') with no specifics, no validation checkpoints, and no feedback loops. For a skill involving potentially destructive or sensitive operations, this is insufficient. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is a reference to `resources/implementation-playbook.md` which is one level deep and clearly signaled, which is good. However, the SKILL.md itself contains almost no substantive content—it's essentially an empty shell pointing elsewhere, with the overview providing no useful quick-start information. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
- Commit
d739c8b
- 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.