CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

top-web-vulnerabilities

This skill should be used when the user asks to "identify web application vulnerabilities", "explain common security flaws", "understand vulnerability categories", "learn about injection attacks", "review access control weaknesses", "analyze API security issues", "assess security misconfigurations", "understand client-side vulnerabilities", "examine mobile and IoT security flaws", or "reference the OWASP-aligned vulnerability taxonomy". Use this skill to provide comprehensive vulnerability definitions, root causes, impacts, and mitigation strategies across all major web security categories.

63

Quality

75%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/top-web-vulnerabilities/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%

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

The body is a comprehensive, well-organized vulnerability taxonomy with useful summary tables and OWASP mapping, but it functions as an inline encyclopedia that largely restates known security concepts. It lacks executable guidance, validation checkpoints, and external progressive-disclosure structure.

Suggestions

Split the 15-phase catalog into per-category reference files (e.g. references/injection.md, references/api-security.md) and keep SKILL.md as a lean overview that links one level deep.

Replace the verbose Definition/Root Cause/Impact/Mitigation prose for well-known vulnerabilities with concise tables or pointers, and reserve detail for nuances Claude would not already know.

Add an actionable assessment workflow with concrete tool commands (e.g. Burp/ZAP invocations) and validation checkpoints (confirm finding -> verify mitigation) rather than descriptive verification-technique lists.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~530-line body catalogues 100 well-known vulnerabilities (XSS, SQLi, SSRF, etc.) with Definition/Root Cause/Impact/Mitigation blocks, much of which restates concepts Claude already knows; it is organized but padded relative to its information value.

2 / 3

Actionability

It is a descriptive reference catalog rather than executable guidance; the only concrete artifact is a static security-headers block, while verification tables ('Payload testing with encoded variants', 'Out-of-band DNS/HTTP callbacks') give direction but not copy-paste-ready commands.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Content is sequenced into 15 assessment phases, but there are no validation checkpoints, verification gates, or feedback loops for the assessment process itself, leaving the workflow present but checkpoint-free.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Everything lives in a single monolithic file with no bundle files or one-level-deep references; a catalog of this size would benefit from being split across category-specific reference files with a lean overview.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

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.

The description is well-constructed: it states concrete capabilities, provides an extensive set of natural trigger phrases, and explicitly covers both what the skill does and when to use it. Third-person voice is maintained throughout.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions such as 'identify web application vulnerabilities', 'review access control weaknesses', and 'provide comprehensive vulnerability definitions, root causes, impacts, and mitigation strategies', matching the score-3 anchor for multiple specific concrete actions.

3 / 3

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (provide definitions, root causes, impacts, mitigations across categories) and 'when' ('This skill should be used when the user asks to...'), with explicit 'Use when...' style triggers.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes many natural phrasings a user would actually say ('explain common security flaws', 'learn about injection attacks', 'analyze API security issues'), giving good coverage of likely trigger terms.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to a clear niche — an OWASP-aligned web vulnerability taxonomy/reference — with distinct triggers that make it unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (544 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
zebbern/claude-code-guide
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.