scanning-tools

This skill should be used when the user asks to "perform vulnerability scanning", "scan networks for open ports", "assess web application security", "scan wireless networks", "detect malware", "check cloud security", or "evaluate system compliance". It provides comprehensive guidance on security scanning tools and methodologies.

Quality

69%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

High

Do not use without reviewing

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/scanning-tools/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

65%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 is highly actionable with copy-paste-ready commands and reasonable section structure, but it is a monolithic single file with no progressive disclosure to separate references and lacks validation checkpoints around its destructive/batch operations.

Suggestions

Move deep per-tool references (Nmap flag catalog, Common Ports table) into separate files under references/ and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview pointing to them, improving progressive disclosure.

Add explicit validation/authorization checkpoints before destructive or batch steps (e.g., 'confirm written authorization and scope before running deauth or --remove operations; verify scan target before launching').

Trim well-known reference material (common ports table, exhaustive timing-flag listings) to reduce token cost where Claude already knows the content.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly executable command references without concept explanation, but the exhaustive flag listings and a Common Ports Reference table restate well-known information that could be trimmed, fitting anchor 3.	3 / 5
Actionability	It provides extensive copy-paste-ready, executable commands across all tool categories (nmap, masscan, nessus, prowler, lynis, etc.) covering the common cases, matching anchor 5.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Phase 8 gives a sequenced methodology and Troubleshooting gives ordered fixes, but destructive/batch operations (deauth attacks, clamscan --remove, Metasploit exploitation) lack inter-step validation checkpoints, so the rubric's cap at 3 applies.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist and all content is inlined in one ~580-line SKILL.md; section structure is clear, but per-tool reference material that belongs in separate files is not split out, fitting anchor 3.	3 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

73%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 explicitly pairs a 'when' trigger list with a 'what' statement and uses natural, domain-specific trigger phrases with low conflict risk. Its main weakness is generic action language ('provides comprehensive guidance') rather than naming concrete capabilities.

Suggestions

Replace 'provides comprehensive guidance on security scanning tools and methodologies' with concrete actions, e.g. 'selects and runs scanning tools, configures scans, and interprets findings across network, web, wireless, malware, cloud, and compliance domains'.

Add a few synonyms or casual phrasings to the trigger list (e.g. 'find open ports', 'check for vulnerabilities') to broaden natural-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names seven concrete task categories (vulnerability scanning, port scanning, web app security, wireless, malware, cloud, compliance) but the action verb is generic ('provides comprehensive guidance'), so it sits between anchor 2 and anchor 3.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both what ('provides comprehensive guidance on security scanning tools and methodologies') and when (explicit 'should be used when the user asks to...' trigger list) are present; the 'when' is concrete but the 'what' is generic, so it does not reach anchor 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Seven natural phrasings a user would say are quoted explicitly ('perform vulnerability scanning', 'scan networks for open ports', etc.), giving good coverage, though they are slightly formal and lack synonyms or variations.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The trigger phrases target a clear security-scanning niche (port scanning, wireless, compliance) with distinct, domain-specific triggers and minimal overlap risk with unrelated skills.	5 / 5
	Total	16 / 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (590 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: zebbern/claude-code-guide
Path: skills/scanning-tools/SKILL.md
Commit: 9d252b3

Reviewed: 2 days 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.