Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

skill-auditor(技能审核员)

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。

skill-auditor 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,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 56,650。

总安装 447周安装 19GitHub Stars 35下载 157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:skill-auditor(技能审核员)
来源仓库:https://github.com/petekp/claude-code-setup
仓库路径:skills/skill-auditor
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/petekp/claude-code-setup --skill skill-auditor
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/petekp/claude-code-setup --skill skill-auditor

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。

skill-auditor 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,适合梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险。适用于研究检索类任务,特别适合安全相关的技术审计和风险评估工作。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,支持多宿主环境集成。

使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据时应先确认最小权限。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/skill-auditor

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/petekp/claude-code-setup --skill skill-auditor;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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

skill-auditor 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/petekp/claude-code-setup --skill skill-auditor。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

skill-auditor 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。

skill-auditor 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

skill-auditor 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。

skill-auditor 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 447 次,近一周安装 19 次,下载 157 次,GitHub 35 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。

skill-auditor 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

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。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

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。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

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
skill-auditor

技能审核员 · 本页

44735只读未明确通过

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

Skill Auditor

Comprehensive assessment of your skill ecosystem with actionable recommendations.

Workflow

Phase 1: Inventory

Gather all skills from:

  1. Global skills: ~/.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md
  2. Project skills: ./skills/*/SKILL.md or ./.claude/skills/*/SKILL.md

For each skill, extract:

  • Name and description from frontmatter
  • Line count of SKILL.md
  • Presence of reference files, scripts, assets
  • Any non-standard frontmatter fields

Phase 2: Individual Assessment

Evaluate each skill against these criteria:

Frontmatter Quality
CriterionCheck
Description completenessDoes it explain both WHAT and WHEN?
Trigger coverageAre all reasonable trigger phrases included?
Description lengthSufficient detail without being excessive (50-300 words ideal)
Non-standard fieldsAny fields beyond name/description? (often unnecessary)
Content Quality
CriterionCheck
Line countUnder 500 lines? (Over suggests need for reference split)
Progressive disclosureDoes it use reference files for detailed content?
ActionabilityAre instructions concrete and procedural?
Output contractsDoes it specify expected output format?
ExamplesDoes it include good/bad examples where helpful?
Structure Quality
CriterionCheck
Reference organizationAre references in references/ directory?
Script availabilityAre reusable operations scripted?
Internal linksAre reference files linked from SKILL.md?
Naming consistencyDo file names follow conventions?

Phase 3: Ecosystem Assessment

Evaluate the skill collection as a whole:

Coverage Analysis
  • Domain clusters: What areas do skills cover? Any gaps?
  • Overlap detection: Do multiple skills cover similar territory?
  • Workflow completeness: Can common tasks be handled end-to-end?
Consistency Analysis
  • Style uniformity: Do skills use consistent formatting?
  • Trigger pattern consistency: Are similar skills triggered similarly?
  • Output format consistency: Do related skills produce compatible outputs?
Organization Analysis
  • Global vs project split: Are skills appropriately scoped?
  • Naming conventions: Are names consistent and discoverable?
  • Documentation quality: Is the overall system documented?

Phase 4: Generate Report

Output Format

# Skill Ecosystem Audit

**Generated**: [timestamp]
**Skills audited**: [count] global, [count] project-level

## Executive Summary

[2-3 sentences: overall health, biggest opportunities, critical issues if any]

**Health Score**: [X/100]

## Quick Stats

| Metric | Value | Assessment |
|--------|-------|------------|
| Total skills | [n] | — |
| Avg SKILL.md lines | [n] | [Good/High/Concerning] |
| Skills over 500 lines | [n] | [Needs attention if >0] |
| Skills with references | [n]% | [Good if >30%] |
| Skills with scripts | [n]% | — |
| Duplicate coverage areas | [n] | [Needs review if >0] |

## Top Recommendations

### Priority 1: [Most impactful improvement]
[Specific action with affected skills]

### Priority 2: [Second improvement]
[Specific action with affected skills]

### Priority 3: [Third improvement]
[Specific action with affected skills]

## Individual Skill Assessments

### [skill-name] — [Grade: A/B/C/D]

**Strengths:**
- [What works well]

**Issues:**
- [Specific problem] → [Specific fix]

**Quick wins:**
- [ ] [Actionable improvement]

[Repeat for each skill, ordered by grade (worst first for attention)]

## Domain Coverage Map

| Domain | Skills | Coverage |
|--------|--------|----------|
| [e.g., Design] | [list] | [Complete/Partial/Gap] |
| [e.g., Code Quality] | [list] | [Complete/Partial/Gap] |

## Overlap Analysis

[If overlaps exist, describe which skills overlap and recommend consolidation]

## Ecosystem Recommendations

### Organization
- [Recommendations for how skills are organized]

### Consistency
- [Recommendations for standardizing across skills]

### Missing Skills
- [Suggestions for skills that would complement the ecosystem]

Grading Rubric

Individual Skills

GradeCriteria
AClear triggers, concise content (<300 lines), uses references appropriately, has output contract, well-organized
BGood triggers, reasonable length, mostly organized, minor improvements possible
CTriggers could be better, content somewhat long, organization issues, needs work
DWeak triggers, bloated content (>500 lines), poor organization, significant rewrite needed

Ecosystem Health Score

Calculate from:

  • Average individual grade (40%)
  • Coverage breadth without overlap (20%)
  • Consistency across skills (20%)
  • Progressive disclosure usage (10%)
  • Script/automation presence (10%)

Common Issues & Fixes

"Description doesn't include trigger phrases"

Fix: Add explicit "Use when..." phrases that match how users actually invoke the skill.

"SKILL.md over 500 lines"

Fix: Move detailed content to references/ files. Keep only workflow and essential quick-reference in SKILL.md.

"No output contract"

Fix: Add a section specifying what format the skill's output should take.

"Duplicate coverage with [other-skill]"

Fix: Either consolidate into one skill, or clearly differentiate triggers so they don't compete.

"Missing reference links"

Fix: If references exist, link them from SKILL.md with guidance on when to load each.

"Non-standard frontmatter fields"

Fix: Remove fields beyond name and description unless specifically needed for skill behavior (rare).

Proactive Recommendations

Based on common skill ecosystem patterns, also check for:

  1. Missing meta-skill: Is there a skill for creating/improving skills? (skill-creator)
  2. Missing checkpoint skill: Is there a way to pause and assess? (checkpoint)
  3. Missing handoff skill: Can sessions be continued? (bootstrap)
  4. Missing review skills: Are there skills for quality gates? (code review, design critique)

Running the Audit

Quick audit (overview only)

# Count skills and sizes
find ~/.claude/skills -name "SKILL.md" -exec wc -l {} \; | sort -n
find ./skills -name "SKILL.md" -exec wc -l {} \; 2>/dev/null | sort -n

Full audit

  1. Inventory all skills
  2. Read each SKILL.md frontmatter and assess
  3. Check for reference/script directories
  4. Compile findings into report format above

When to Audit

  • After adding several new skills: Check for overlap and consistency
  • Periodically (quarterly): Ensure ecosystem stays healthy
  • Before sharing skills: Verify quality before distribution
  • When skills feel ineffective: Diagnose what's not working

平台分布

Codex

34.32%
按下载量换算54

Claude

26.81%
按下载量换算42

Cursor

19.95%
按下载量换算31

Gemini CLI

9.5%
按下载量换算15

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。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