agentleFS
DailybotHQDailybotHQ/deepworkplan-website/.agents/skills/security-check/SKILL.md

security-check

Skill15 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Quick security checklist for a PR or set of files (secrets, input, logging). Use proactively for security reviews.

  • Reads credentials

30 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use learn and code-review.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • genomewalkerSkill

    learn

    Learn from web sources, generate SKILL.md, and store key patterns in soul memory. Trigger keywords: learn, skill-gen, web-learn, documentation, tutorial.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    code-review

    Adversarial systems, concurrency, memory-model, and architecture code review protocol. Use this skill whenever asked to review code, PRs, diffs, or branches in Filament.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 22 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Run a quick, checklist-based security pass on changed files or a PR: no hardcoded secrets, proper input handling, no sensitive data in …

    line 18
  2. Distinctive:

    Does NOT perform full security audit

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Does NOT fix code (review only.

    line 23
  4. Distinctive:

    Does NOT assess infrastructure security

    line 24
  5. Very specific:

    Does NOT replace security-auditor for auth/crypto/data flows

    line 25
  6. Distinctive:

    If any blocking or auth/data issues: recommend security-auditor agent

    line 82
  7. Distinctive:

    When sensitive data handling is involved and issues found:

    line 110
  8. Distinctive:

    Read-only; no code changes

    line 130
  9. Distinctive:

    Escalate to security-auditor: if:

    line 135
  10. Very specific:

    Build output: - Ensure docs/ doesn't contain sensitive data

    line 151
  11. Very specific:

    API routes: - Check src/pages/api/ endpoints for data exposure

    line 152
  12. Very specific:

    Environment variables: - Only PUBLIC_* vars available on client

    line 153

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 22 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Skill: Security Check

Objective

Run a quick, checklist-based security pass on changed files or a PR: no hardcoded secrets, proper input handling, no sensitive data in logs, no obvious OWASP issues. Lightweight; for deeper review escalate to security-auditor agent. Follow docs/SECURITY.md.

Non-Goals

  • Does NOT perform full security audit
  • Does NOT fix code (review only; report findings)
  • Does NOT assess infrastructure security
  • Does NOT replace security-auditor for auth/crypto/data flows

Tier Classification

Tier: 1 - Light/Cheap

Reasoning: Checklist-based; read-only; pattern matching (secrets, sanitization). Escalate to security-auditor when issues found.

Inputs

Required Parameters

  • $TARGET: PR diff, or list of files to check (e.g., paths or "current PR")

Optional Parameters

  • $FOCUS: Focus area (default: all) — e.g., "secrets", "input", "logging"

Prerequisites

  • Target files or PR diff are accessible

Steps

Step 1: Get Scope

  • List changed files or read PR diff

Step 2: Run Checklist

Secrets & config:

  • No hardcoded API keys, tokens, or passwords
  • Secrets via environment variables (.env)
  • No secrets in client-side code (Astro/Svelte)
  • No secrets committed to repository

Input & sanitization:

  • User input validated or sanitized where used
  • No raw input in API responses without sanitization
  • Search/filter inputs properly escaped

Logging:

  • No sensitive data (tokens, PII) in log messages
  • Console logs appropriate for static site context

Static site considerations:

  • No sensitive data in build output
  • API routes don't expose sensitive information
  • Environment variables use proper PUBLIC_ prefix for client-side

Obvious risks:

  • No eval() or unsafe dynamic code on user input
  • No obvious XSS patterns in user-generated content

Step 3: Report

  • List findings by severity (blocking / suggestion)
  • If any blocking or auth/data issues: recommend security-auditor agent

Output Format

Success Output

## ✅ Security Check Complete

### Scope
{Files or PR checked}

### Checklist
- Secrets: ✅
- Input/sanitization: ✅ / ⚠️ / ❌
- Logging: ✅ / ⚠️ / ❌
- Static site risks: ✅

### Findings
**Blocking:** {count} — {brief list}
**Suggestions:** {count} — {brief list}

### Recommendation
{Pass / Request changes / Escalate to security-auditor}

Escalation

When sensitive data handling is involved and issues found:

## 🔄 Escalate to security-auditor

### Reason
{Why deeper review is needed}

### Findings so far
- {Finding 1}
- {Finding 2}

### Next step
Run security-auditor agent for full review (docs/SECURITY.md).

Guardrails

Scope Limits

  • Read-only; no code changes
  • Focus on checklist; for design/OWASP depth use security-auditor

Stop Conditions

Escalate to security-auditor if:

  • Auth or user data handling involved
  • Any blocking finding on secrets
  • Complex data flow requiring deeper analysis

Definition of Done

  • Checklist completed for target scope
  • Findings listed with severity
  • Clear recommendation (pass / request changes / escalate)

Static Site Specific Checks

For Astro static sites:

  1. Build output - Ensure docs/ doesn't contain sensitive data
  2. API routes - Check src/pages/api/ endpoints for data exposure
  3. Environment variables - Only PUBLIC_* vars available on client
  4. Content - Methodology/spec/kit docs don't accidentally include sensitive info

Related

  • security-auditor - Full security review
  • pr-review-lite - General PR checklist
  • docs/SECURITY.md - Security standards

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.