xingmang-defense-judge@1.0.0
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "学术答辩模拟评委智能体。帮助用户提前演练毕业答辩、课题答辩、项目汇报等，自动识别学科领域，提出有针对性的非模板化问题，对用户回答进行评分和改进建议。适用于任何专业和学科（理工、文史、艺术、教育、思政等）。触发于用户提到"答辩""答辩评委""答辩模拟""答辩演练""毕业答辩""课题答辩""答辩准备"等关键词，或主动..." 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 2026-11-14 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 153 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
9 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim smallkeyboy: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.