CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

database-security

Use for authorized database security assessment covering PostgreSQL/MySQL/MSSQL/Mongo/Redis exposure, authz, UDF/command paths, and misconfiguration review.

62

Quality

78%

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/database-security/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

68%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.

An efficiently written, well-structured assessment skill with a clear sequence and safety guards, but it stays at checklist level without executable commands and lacks an explicit error-recovery feedback loop for database operations.

Suggestions

Add a few concrete executable commands/queries for the key checks, e.g. a SQL snippet to enumerate grants or check xp_cmdshell status.

Add an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop around the 利用链验证 step (e.g., re-validate after any fix before proceeding).

Convert reference paths to markdown links and clarify the sibling-skill pointers under 路由上下文 so navigation is unambiguous.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Lean, dense, action-oriented content with checkboxes, a compact tool table, and no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

Gives a concrete sequence, named tools, and specific config items to check (file_priv, xp_cmdshell, load_file), but provides no actual executable commands or queries — guidance stays at the checklist level.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequence (暴露面 → 认证 → 授权 → 配置 → 利用链验证) with safety guards and a completion self-check, but as a database-operations skill it lacks an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback loop, which the rubric caps at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized into short sections with the detailed checklist correctly split into references/db-misconfig-checklist.md (verified to exist) one level deep; minor gaps from plain-path references and informal sibling-skill pointers (../pentest-tools/, ../cloud-k8s/).

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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.

A strong, specific description that names a clear niche and concrete coverage areas with an explicit Use-for trigger. It could improve by phrasing the when-trigger around concrete user situations and adding a few natural synonyms.

Suggestions

Rewrite the trigger as concrete user situations, e.g. "Use when the user asks to audit database exposure, permissions, or dangerous features like xp_cmdshell/COPY PROGRAM/UDF."

Add natural synonyms such as "database audit" or "database pentest" alongside the product names.

Soften jargon ("authz", "UDF/command paths") or pair it with plain-language equivalents so non-expert trigger phrasing still matches.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names concrete coverage areas — "PostgreSQL/MySQL/MSSQL/Mongo/Redis exposure, authz, UDF/command paths, and misconfiguration review" — listing several specific items, but framed as assessment scope rather than discrete actions, leaving minor gaps.

4 / 5

Completeness

Answers both what (database security assessment covering specific areas) and when ("Use for authorized database security assessment"), but the when-trigger restates the task rather than enumerating concrete user situations, so it is not a 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage with database product names and "database security assessment", but terms like "authz" and "UDF/command paths" are jargon and common synonyms (e.g., "database audit", "pentest") are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche — authorized database security assessment across named engines with specific review dimensions — with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
zhaoxuya520/reverse-skill
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.