refinement-loop@1.0.0
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "Design and run iterative generate→critique→revise loops optimized for Claude Opus 4.8, with thinking-as-critic, cost controls, and model routing." 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 2026-11-13 and scored it 70/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Notable findings: Prompt injection attempt; Prompt injection attempt. 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
System: You are an expert [domain] writer and critic.Fix: Keep SKILL.md to visible, descriptive text. Remove comments and encoded text that address the agent.System: You are a strict critic. Do not produce the revised artifact.Fix: Keep SKILL.md to visible, descriptive text. Remove comments and encoded text that address the agent.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
10 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim prometheus-prime: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.