CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

security-threat-model

Repository-grounded threat modeling that enumerates trust boundaries, assets, attacker capabilities, abuse paths, and mitigations, and writes a concise Markdown threat model. Use when the user asks to threat model a codebase or path, enumerate threats or abuse paths, or perform AppSec threat modeling. Do NOT use for general architecture summaries, code review, security best practices (use security-best-practices), or non-security design work.

68

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

62%

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

This is a well-structured instruction-only skill with a clear 8-step workflow that includes user validation checkpoints and a final quality gate. Its main weaknesses are the lack of concrete examples (e.g., a sample threat entry or output snippet) and reliance on external reference files that weren't provided in the bundle, which makes the actionability and progressive disclosure somewhat incomplete. The content is reasonably concise but could be tightened in a few areas.

Suggestions

Add a brief inline example of a single threat entry (showing the expected format for one abuse path with likelihood, impact, priority, and mitigation) so Claude has a concrete template even without loading the reference file.

Include a minimal output skeleton or section headers for the final threat model Markdown file inline, rather than deferring the entire output contract to `references/prompt-template.md`.

Ensure the referenced bundle files (`references/prompt-template.md` and `references/security-controls-and-assets.md`) are actually provided in the bundle so the progressive disclosure structure is functional.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is mostly efficient and avoids explaining basic concepts, but some sections are slightly verbose—e.g., the enumerated lists in steps 2, 3, and 6 could be tightened. The parenthetical examples in risk prioritization guidance add useful context without excessive padding, but phrases like 'not a generic checklist' and 'Prioritizing realistic attacker goals and concrete impacts over generic checklists' are somewhat redundant with each other.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides a clear structured process with specific steps and concrete guidance (e.g., naming conventions for output files, specific questions to ask users, qualitative risk ratings). However, it lacks executable code/commands and concrete examples of what a threat entry or output section looks like—it relies on an external prompt template for the output contract rather than showing even a brief inline example.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step workflow is clearly sequenced with logical progression from scoping through enumeration, prioritization, user validation, mitigation, and a final quality check. Step 6 explicitly includes a validation/feedback loop (pause for user confirmation), and step 8 provides a comprehensive checklist before finalizing. The workflow handles the 'validate -> fix -> retry' pattern well for this type of analytical task.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references external files (`references/prompt-template.md` and `references/security-controls-and-assets.md`) appropriately and keeps the main content as an overview. However, no bundle files were provided, making it impossible to verify these references exist. The inline content is well-structured but the output format/contract is entirely deferred to the reference file with no inline preview, which could leave Claude without critical guidance if the reference is unavailable.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

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 hits all the marks. It provides specific concrete actions, includes natural trigger terms, explicitly addresses both what and when, and proactively mitigates conflict risk by naming exclusions and pointing to an alternative skill. The use of third person voice is correct throughout.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'enumerates trust boundaries, assets, attacker capabilities, abuse paths, and mitigations' and 'writes a concise Markdown threat model'. These are clearly defined, concrete outputs.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (enumerates trust boundaries, assets, attacker capabilities, abuse paths, mitigations; writes Markdown threat model) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when...' clause with triggers). Also includes explicit 'Do NOT use' guidance to prevent misuse, which strengthens the when clause.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'threat model', 'enumerate threats', 'abuse paths', 'AppSec threat modeling', 'codebase'. These cover the natural language variations a user would employ when requesting this type of work.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive with a clear niche in threat modeling. The explicit exclusion clause ('Do NOT use for general architecture summaries, code review, security best practices (use security-best-practices)') directly addresses potential conflicts with adjacent skills and even names the alternative skill.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
tech-leads-club/agent-skills
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.