Propose a patch
A fix the maintainer can act on, with the evidence attached. It opens under your GitHub account in your browser; KillerSkills holds no token and never modifies the package. The fix is verified the only way we verify anything: the next crawl re-runs the new version in the honeypot. 77 · Caution
Evidence
The sandbox observed nothing beyond the static findings; the proposal cites those.
Diff · removes 3 caught lines
Download .patchdiff --git a/README.md b/README.md --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -441,1 +441,0 @@ -<summary>Manual Setup (if you prefer)</summary> > **Tip:** Run `nlm setup add json` for an interactive wizard that generates the right JSON snippet for your too diff --git a/src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py b/src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py --- a/src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py +++ b/src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py @@ -240,1 +240,0 @@ -"""Install/update AGENTS.md format (append with markers).""" diff --git a/src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md b/src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md --- a/src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md +++ b/src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md @@ -316,1 +316,0 @@ -# Each --slide value must be: '<slide-number> <instruction>'
Zero-context hunks: apply with git apply --unidiff-zero fix.patch on the tagged source of 1.0.8. If the behavior is intended, declare it (host under permissions.network, a line in the README) instead of removing it; the next crawl scores declarations.
Issue / PR body
Title: notebooklm-enterprise-mcp: Collapsed <details> block carrying instructions (KillerSkills verdict caution 77)
## What the honeypot observed KillerSkills ran **[email protected]** in an isolated sandbox (decoy credentials, recording proxy, syscall trace; engine 1.8.1) and scored it **CAUTION 77/100**. Summary: no network, touches nothing outside the project, writes no memory. - See the findings below. Full trace and findings: https://killerskills.ai/skills/pypi/notebooklm-enterprise-mcp/1.0.8 ## Findings with a location - `README.md:441` · Collapsed <details> block carrying instructions — README.md:441 · Collapsed <details> block carrying instructions - `src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py:240` · Instructs the agent to modify its persistent memory or instruction files — src/notebooklm_tools/cli/commands/skill.py:240 · Instructs the agent to modify its persistent memory or instruction files · informational: not an instruction file - `src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md:316` · Fake instruction boundary tag — src/notebooklm_tools/data/SKILL.md:316 · Fake instruction boundary tag ## Proposed change The attached patch removes the 3 lines above. If the behavior is intended, the fix is to declare it instead: list the host under `permissions.network` (or the MCP manifest) and say in the README why the package needs it; the next crawl will re-score it with the declaration taken into account. ## How this will be verified Nothing is "verified safe" by assertion. When a new version is published, KillerSkills re-runs it in the honeypot and the verdict page updates; you can trigger it early from the verdict page ("Re-scan after I publish a fix"). Reply here or at [email protected] if you believe the verdict is wrong; disputes are reviewed by a person and the outcome is published on the verdict page. _Proposed through killerskills.ai/threats by a user of the package, under their own GitHub account. The evidence is public; the package was never modified by KillerSkills._
# or from a terminal, under your own account: gh repo fork Robiton/notebooklm-mcp-cli --clone && cd notebooklm-mcp-cli curl -s https://killerskills.ai/skills/pypi/notebooklm-enterprise-mcp/1.0.8/patch.diff | git apply --unidiff-zero git checkout -b killerskills/1.0.8 && git commit -am "notebooklm-enterprise-mcp: Collapsed <details> block carrying instructions" gh pr create --fill --body-file <(curl -s https://killerskills.ai/skills/pypi/notebooklm-enterprise-mcp/1.0.8/patch.md)
We count proposals opened, not merged: a merge shows up as a new version that the crawl re-runs. Disputes: the maintainer can contest the verdict from its page; a person reviews it and the outcome is published.