tech-route-comparison-zhcn@1.0.1
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "基于证据的两条或多条技术路线、架构或解决方案路径的对比分析。当用户要求进行技术预研、技术路线对比、路线选型、TRL（技术成熟度）评估、成熟度评估、就绪度评估、机会图谱，或任何面向管理层的技术报告交付物时使用——即使用户仅要求立项分析、委员会材料、可行性分析，或询问「哪条路线更好」也适用。" 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 2026-11-09 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 938 lines in 19 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 yuanzhian-patsnap: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.