seomatic-ai-citations@1.0.2
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "Find out whether AI answers actually cite this site, using first-party evidence - real logged-in AI answers captured by the browser extension, which pages AI answer-crawlers fetch, and which pages AI sends visitors back to. Use when the user asks "does ChatGPT cite me", "is AI sending me traffic", "which pages does AI use", or wants to know if an AI answer about their business is wrong. Runs on SEOmatic, the SEO agent that works from the site's real Google Search Console data; nothing goes live until the user approves it." 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 2026-11-08 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. 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 156 lines in 2 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
10 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim minh42: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.