Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

dependency-audit(依赖性审计)

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

dependency-audit 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 59,579。

总安装 384周安装 16GitHub Stars 217下载 128核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:dependency-audit(依赖性审计)
来源仓库:https://github.com/mathews-tom/praxis-skills
仓库路径:skills/dependency-audit
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/mathews-tom/praxis-skills --skill dependency-audit
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/mathews-tom/praxis-skills --skill dependency-audit

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

dependency-audit 用于辅助安全审计、权限检查和常见漏洞排查。适合梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险或分析鉴权逻辑。适用于 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中的安全审查场景。通过 npx 安装,不能将工具输出直接作为最终结论。涉及密钥、令牌或生产系统时,需先确认最小权限和操作边界。

来源仓库内路径:skills/dependency-audit

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/mathews-tom/praxis-skills --skill dependency-a…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

dependency-audit 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/mathews-tom/praxis-skills --skill dependency-audit。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

dependency-audit 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

dependency-audit 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

dependency-audit 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

dependency-audit 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 384 次,近一周安装 16 次,下载 128 次,GitHub 217 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

dependency-audit 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
dependency-audit

依赖性审计 · 本页

384217需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Dependency Audit

Comprehensive dependency risk assessment: license compatibility analysis, maintenance health scoring, CVE detection, bloat identification, and transitive dependency risk mapping. Produces an actionable report with prioritized remediation steps organized by urgency (security → license → maintenance → bloat).

Reference Files

FileContentsLoad When
references/license-compatibility.mdLicense compatibility matrix, copyleft detection, commercial-safe licensesAlways
references/health-metrics.mdMaintenance health indicators, scoring criteria, abandonment detectionAlways
references/bloat-detection.mdIdentifying unused deps, duplicate functionality, heavy transitive treesBloat analysis requested
references/cve-sources.mdCVE databases, advisory sources, vulnerability severity interpretationSecurity audit requested

Prerequisites

  • Access to the project's dependency files (pyproject.toml, requirements.txt, package.json, Cargo.toml, go.mod)
  • Lock file (for exact versions and transitive dependencies)
  • Project license (to determine compatibility requirements)

Workflow

Phase 1: Parse Dependency Tree

  1. Direct dependencies — Packages explicitly declared in the project.
  2. Transitive dependencies — Dependencies of dependencies. Often 10-50x the direct count.
  3. Version constraints — Pinned (==1.2.3), ranged (>=1.0,<2.0), or floating (*).
  4. Development vs production — Separate dev/test dependencies from production.

Tools:

  • Python: uv pip list, pip-audit, pipdeptree
  • Node.js: npm list --all, npm audit
  • Rust: cargo tree, cargo audit

Phase 2: Audit Licenses

For each dependency:

  1. Identify the license — Check package metadata, LICENSE file, pyproject.toml.
  2. Classify compatibility — Against the project's own license: License Commercial OK Copyleft Risk Level MIT, BSD, ISC, Apache 2.0 Yes No Low LGPL With care Weak Medium GPL-2.0, GPL-3.0 No (unless GPL project) Strong High AGPL No (unless AGPL project) Strong + network Critical Unknown Cannot determine Unknown Critical
  3. Flag issues — Copyleft licenses in proprietary projects, unknown licenses, license changes between versions.

Phase 3: Assess Maintenance Health

For each dependency, evaluate maintenance signals:

IndicatorHealthyWarningAbandoned
Last release< 6 months6-18 months> 18 months
Commits (90 days)10+1-90
Open issues response< 2 weeks2-8 weeks> 8 weeks or no response
Bus factor3+ maintainers21
CI statusPassingFlakyFailing or absent

Phase 4: Check Security

  1. Known CVEs — Check against advisory databases:

- Python: pip-audit, PyPI advisory database - Node.js: npm audit, GitHub Advisory Database - General: NVD (National Vulnerability Database)

  1. Severity classification — CVSS score interpretation: CVSS Score Severity Action 9.0-10.0 Critical Upgrade immediately 7.0-8.9 High Upgrade within days 4.0-6.9 Medium Upgrade within weeks 0.1-3.9 Low Upgrade at convenience
  2. Fix availability — Is there a patched version? If not, what's the workaround?

Phase 5: Detect Bloat

  1. Unused dependencies — Dependencies imported nowhere in the codebase.
  2. Duplicate functionality — Multiple packages doing the same thing (2 HTTP clients, 2 JSON parsers).
  3. Heavy transitive trees — Packages that pull in dozens of sub-dependencies for a simple feature.
  4. Size analysis — Large packages used for small functionality.

Phase 6: Report

Produce a prioritized report with action items.

Output Format

## Dependency Audit: {Project Name}

### Summary
| Metric | Count |
|--------|-------|
| Direct dependencies | {N} |
| Transitive dependencies | {N} |
| License issues | {N} |
| Maintenance concerns | {N} |
| Security vulnerabilities | {N} |
| Bloat candidates | {N} |

### License Compliance

| Package | Version | License | Compatible | Issue |
|---------|---------|---------|------------|-------|
| {pkg} | {ver} | MIT | Yes | None |
| {pkg} | {ver} | GPL-3.0 | No | Copyleft in proprietary project |
| {pkg} | {ver} | Unknown | Unknown | License not identifiable |

### Maintenance Health

| Package | Last Release | Commits (90d) | Maintainers | Status |
|---------|-------------|---------------|-------------|--------|
| {pkg} | {date} | {N} | {N} | {Healthy/Warning/Abandoned} |

### Security Vulnerabilities

| Package | Version | CVE | Severity | Fix Available | Fixed In |
|---------|---------|-----|----------|---------------|----------|
| {pkg} | {ver} | {CVE-ID} | {severity} | {Yes/No} | {version} |

### Bloat Analysis

| Package | Install Size | Used By | Recommendation |
|---------|-------------|---------|----------------|
| {pkg} | {size} | {usage description} | {Remove/Replace/Keep} |

### Action Items

#### Immediate (Security)
1. Upgrade {pkg} to {version} — fixes {CVE-ID} ({severity})

#### Short-term (License)
1. Review {pkg} GPL usage — may require license change or removal

#### Medium-term (Maintenance)
1. Find alternative to {pkg} — abandoned since {date}

#### Long-term (Bloat)
1. Remove {pkg} — unused in codebase
2. Replace {pkg} with lighter alternative

### Transitive Risk
- {direct-dep} depends on {transitive-dep} which has {issue}

Calibration Rules

  1. Production dependencies first. Dev/test dependencies have lower risk since they don't ship to users. Audit production dependencies with higher scrutiny.
  2. Transitive risk is real. A direct dependency with MIT license may pull in a GPL transitive dependency. Always check the full tree.
  3. Abandoned is not broken. A mature, stable library that hasn't been updated in a year may be perfectly fine. Evaluate based on whether the library is "done" vs "neglected."
  4. Security is non-negotiable. Critical and High CVEs must be addressed immediately. Medium CVEs should be tracked. Low CVEs can wait for the next dependency update cycle.

Error Handling

ProblemResolution
No lock file availableAudit based on declared dependencies. Note that transitive analysis is incomplete without a lock file.
License metadata missingCheck the package's repository for LICENSE file. Note packages where license cannot be determined.
Package registry unavailableWork from cached metadata and local lockfile data.
Too many dependencies to audit manuallyPrioritize: production deps first, then direct deps, then transitive deps with known issues.

When NOT to Audit

Push back if:

  • The project is a prototype that won't ship — defer audit until production decision
  • The user wants dependency updates, not audit — different task (dependabot, renovate)
  • The project has no dependencies (pure standard library) — nothing to audit

Rationalizations

RationalizationReality
"It's a trusted package"Trust is not a security model — trusted packages get compromised (event-stream, ua-parser-js, colors.js)
"Only a minor version bump"Minor versions can introduce vulnerabilities, change behavior, or add transitive dependencies — semver is a promise, not a guarantee
"We don't use the vulnerable function"Transitive dependencies might — and attack surface includes any code loaded into the process
"The CVE is low severity"Low severity in isolation can be critical in your context — a "low" SSRF in an internal service with cloud metadata access is critical
"We'll update when there's a known exploit"Known exploits mean you're already behind — patch within SLA, not after breach
"Too many dependencies to audit"That's the problem, not an excuse — high dependency count IS a risk finding

Red Flags

  • Auditing only direct dependencies while ignoring transitive dependency tree
  • Dismissing CVEs without checking if the vulnerable code path is reachable
  • No license compatibility check — GPL in a proprietary codebase is a legal finding
  • Accepting "no known vulnerabilities" from a single scanner without cross-referencing
  • Ignoring dependency age — unmaintained packages with no updates in 2+ years are a risk
  • Skipping lockfile analysis (pinned vs. floating versions)

Verification

  • Both direct and transitive dependencies scanned
  • Vulnerability scanner output captured: npm audit / pip-audit / cargo audit
  • Each CVE finding includes: severity, affected version range, upgrade path, reachability assessment
  • License compatibility verified against project license
  • Dependency age and maintenance status checked for top-level deps
  • Lockfile present and version pinning verified — no floating ranges in production

平台分布

Codex

36.79%
按下载量换算47

Claude

28.65%
按下载量换算37

Cursor

17.16%
按下载量换算22

Gemini CLI

9.9%
按下载量换算13

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills