guidelines-advisor
Skill1 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Comprehensive smart contract development advisor based on Trail of Bits' best practices. Analyzes codebase to generate documentation/specifications, review architecture, check upgradeability patterns, assess implementation quality, identify pitfalls, review dependencies, and evaluate testing. Provides actionable recommendations. (project, gitignored)
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 6 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
6
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 138
When the analysis is complete, you'll receive comprehensive guidance covering:
- Common: line 186
When invoked, I will:
- Common: line 192
Check for proxies/upgrades
- Common: line 196
Create plain English system description
- Common: line 207
Check for common pitfalls
- Common: line 213
Ask clarifying questions about design decisions
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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.
Files
Guidelines Advisor
Purpose
I will systematically analyze your codebase and provide comprehensive guidance based on Trail of Bits' development guidelines. I'll help you:
- Generate documentation and specifications (plain English descriptions, architectural diagrams, code documentation)
- Optimize on-chain/off-chain architecture (only if applicable)
- Review upgradeability patterns (if your project has upgrades)
- Check delegatecall/proxy implementations (if present)
- Assess implementation quality (functions, inheritance, events)
- Identify common pitfalls
- Review dependencies
- Evaluate test suite and suggest improvements
Framework: Building Secure Contracts - Development Guidelines
How This Works
Phase 1: Discovery & Context
I'll explore the codebase to understand:
- Project structure and platform
- Contract/module files and their purposes
- Existing documentation
- Architecture patterns (proxies, upgrades, etc.)
- Testing setup
- Dependencies
Phase 2: Documentation Generation
I'll help create:
- Plain English system description
- Architectural diagrams (using Slither printers for Solidity)
- Code documentation recommendations (NatSpec for Solidity)
Phase 3: Architecture Analysis
I'll analyze:
- On-chain vs off-chain component distribution (if applicable)
- Upgradeability approach (if applicable)
- Delegatecall proxy patterns (if present)
Phase 4: Implementation Review
I'll assess:
- Function composition and clarity
- Inheritance structure
- Event logging practices
- Common pitfalls presence
- Dependencies quality
- Testing coverage and techniques
Phase 5: Recommendations
I'll provide:
- Prioritized improvement suggestions
- Best practice guidance
- Actionable next steps
Assessment Areas
I analyze 11 comprehensive areas covering all aspects of smart contract development. For detailed criteria, best practices, and specific checks, see ASSESSMENT_AREAS.md.
Quick Reference:
- Documentation & Specifications
- Plain English system descriptions
- Architectural diagrams
- NatSpec completeness (Solidity)
- Documentation gaps identification
- On-Chain vs Off-Chain Computation
- Complexity analysis
- Gas optimization opportunities
- Verification vs computation patterns
- Upgradeability
- Migration vs upgradeability trade-offs
- Data separation patterns
- Upgrade procedure documentation
- Delegatecall Proxy Pattern
- Storage layout consistency
- Initialization patterns
- Function shadowing risks
- Slither upgradeability checks
- Function Composition
- Function size and clarity
- Logical grouping
- Modularity assessment
- Inheritance
- Hierarchy depth/width
- Diamond problem risks
- Inheritance visualization
- Events
- Critical operation coverage
- Event naming consistency
- Indexed parameters
- Common Pitfalls
- Reentrancy patterns
- Integer overflow/underflow
- Access control issues
- Platform-specific vulnerabilities
- Dependencies
- Library quality assessment
- Version management
- Dependency manager usage
- Copied code detection
- Testing & Verification
- Coverage analysis
- Fuzzing techniques
- Formal verification
- CI/CD integration
- Platform-Specific Guidance
- Solidity version recommendations
- Compiler warning checks
- Inline assembly warnings
- Platform-specific tools
For complete details on each area including what I'll check, analyze, and recommend, see ASSESSMENT_AREAS.md.
Example Output
When the analysis is complete, you'll receive comprehensive guidance covering:
- System documentation with plain English descriptions
- Architectural diagrams and documentation gaps
- Architecture analysis (on-chain/off-chain, upgradeability, proxies)
- Implementation review (functions, inheritance, events, pitfalls)
- Dependencies and testing evaluation
- Prioritized recommendations (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW)
- Overall assessment and path to production
For a complete example analysis report, see EXAMPLE_REPORT.md.
Deliverables
I provide four comprehensive deliverable categories:
1. System Documentation
- Plain English descriptions
- Architectural diagrams
- Documentation gaps analysis
2. Architecture Analysis
- On-chain/off-chain assessment
- Upgradeability review
- Proxy pattern security review
3. Implementation Review
- Function composition analysis
- Inheritance assessment
- Events coverage
- Pitfall identification
- Dependencies evaluation
- Testing analysis
4. Prioritized Recommendations
- CRITICAL (address immediately)
- HIGH (address before deployment)
- MEDIUM (address for production quality)
- LOW (nice to have)
For detailed templates and examples of each deliverable, see DELIVERABLES.md.
Assessment Process
When invoked, I will:
- Explore the codebase
- Identify all contract/module files
- Find existing documentation
- Locate test files
- Check for proxies/upgrades
- Identify dependencies
- Generate documentation
- Create plain English system description
- Generate architectural diagrams (if tools available)
- Identify documentation gaps
- Analyze architecture
- Assess on-chain/off-chain distribution (if applicable)
- Review upgradeability approach (if applicable)
- Audit proxy patterns (if present)
- Review implementation
- Analyze functions, inheritance, events
- Check for common pitfalls
- Assess dependencies
- Evaluate testing
- Provide recommendations
- Present findings with file references
- Ask clarifying questions about design decisions
- Suggest prioritized improvements
- Offer actionable next steps
Rationalizations (Do Not Skip)
| Rationalization | Why It's Wrong | Required Action |
| "System is simple, description covers everything" | Plain English descriptions miss security-critical details | Complete all 5 phases: documentation, architecture, implementation, dependencies, recommendations |
| "No upgrades detected, skip upgradeability section" | Upgradeability can be implicit (ownable patterns, delegatecall) | Search for proxy patterns, delegatecall, storage collisions before declaring N/A |
| "Not applicable" without verification | Premature scope reduction misses vulnerabilities | Verify with explicit codebase search before skipping any guideline section |
| "Architecture is straightforward, no analysis needed" | Obvious architectures have subtle trust boundaries | Analyze on-chain/off-chain distribution, access control flow, external dependencies |
| "Common pitfalls don't apply to this codebase" | Every codebase has common pitfalls | Systematically check all guideline pitfalls with grep/code search |
| "Tests exist, testing guideline is satisfied" | Test existence ≠ test quality | Check coverage, property-based tests, integration tests, failure cases |
| "I can provide generic best practices" | Generic advice isn't actionable | Provide project-specific findings with file:line references |
| "User knows what to improve from findings" | Findings without prioritization = no action plan | Generate prioritized improvement roadmap with specific next steps |
Notes
- I'll only analyze relevant sections (won't hallucinate about upgrades if not present)
- I'll adapt to your platform (Solidity, Rust, Cairo, etc.)
- I'll use available tools (Slither, etc.) but work without them if unavailable
- I'll provide file references and line numbers for all findings
- I'll ask questions about design decisions I can't infer from code
Ready to Begin
What I'll need:
- Access to your codebase
- Context about your project goals
- Any existing documentation or specifications
- Information about deployment plans
Let's analyze your codebase and improve it using Trail of Bits' best practices!
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- Samueladewole/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 3
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 095% same
- rehrabbi/claude-skills★ 095% same
- TheWatcher01/skills★ 095% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository125 other files it gives its agents.
- skills/vercel-composition-patterns/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/vercel-react-best-practices/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/vercel-react-native-skills/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- address-sanitizerSkill
- aflppSkill
- algorand-vulnerability-scannerSkill
- algorithmic-artSkill
- ask-questions-if-underspecifiedSkill
- atherisSkill
- audit-context-buildingSkill
- audit-prep-assistantSkill
- autonomous-skillSkill
- aws-skillsSkill
- better-authSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- brand-guidelinesSkill
- burpsuite-project-parserSkill
- cairo-vulnerability-scannerSkill
- canvas-designSkill
- cargo-fuzzSkill
- changelog-generatorSkill
- claude-in-chrome-troubleshootingSkill
- cloudflare-skillsSkill
- code-maturity-assessorSkill
- codeqlSkill
- codex-skillSkill
- constant-time-analysisSkill
- constant-time-testingSkill
- cosmos-vulnerability-scannerSkill
- coverage-analysisSkill
- d3js-visualizationSkill
- db-resetSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- deploySkill
- dev-startSkill
- differential-reviewSkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- doc-coauthoringSkill
- doc-generateSkill
- documentationSkill
- docxSkill
- dwarf-expertSkill
- entry-point-analyzerSkill
- env-checkSkill
- executing-plansSkill
- expo-skillsSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- firebase-apk-scannerSkill
- fix-reviewSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- fuzzing-dictionarySkill
- fuzzing-obstaclesSkill
- git-automationSkill
- google-design-mdSkill
- harness-writingSkill
- health-checkSkill
- huggingface-skillsSkill
- insecure-defaultsSkill
- internal-commsSkill
- interpreting-culture-indexSkill
- The first 60 shown.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

