concept-validation-tech-validation-engine@1.0.0
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "概念验证中心技术验证引擎。当用户需要验证技术可行性、评估TRL等级、设计技术验证方案、进行多路线并行对比时使用。本技能是验验（技术验证师）的核心工具，支持TRL 1-4阶段的技术成熟度评估、3维轻一致性验证、技术风险识别。适用于技术方案评估、原型验证设计、技术路线对比等场景。与中试基地工艺熟化引擎（TRL 5-7..." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Coverage
Static only; nothing was run yet.The label rests on the code, the instruction files and the publisher. The honeypot run replaces this verdict when it completes.
Is [email protected] safe to install?
KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-11 and scored it 71/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
Behavior trace
Queued for honeypot run · static analysis onlyThis version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.
Static findings
No findings across 973 lines in 3 files.
Cost to the agent
Tokens estimated at four characters each. Skills load their instruction text when triggered; the figure is what that costs.
Known vulnerabilities
Vulnerability advisories (OSV) cover npm and PyPI packages; this registry has no advisory database.
What would make this Verified
9 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim golngod: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.