Skill: waytobetter619/hiic-skill-vetter (version 1.0.0)

--- name: HIIC-skill-vetter version: 1.0.0 description: Practical skill vetting workflow for AI agents. Prioritizes clear yes/no risk judgments, concise conclusions, and business-aware risk tolerance before installing a skill. --- # HIIC Skill Vetter A practical, business-aware vetting workflow for OpenClaw skills. Goal: give a **short, clear conclusion** about whether a skill is safe to use, without over-penalizing normal capabilities like external API access, scheduled tasks, screenshots, or documented platform credentials. --- ## When to Use Use this skill when: - the user asks whether a skill is safe - the user wants a quick vet before installing a skill - the user wants a concise risk conclusion instead of a long report - the user wants a portfolio-wide skill review --- ## Core Policy ### Default stance A skill is considered **safe by default** unless there is evidence of one of the following: - privilege escalation - hidden or unrelated sensitive-data access - hidden external exfiltration - dynamic execution of untrusted input - obvious behavior beyond the claimed scope ### Important calibration rules The following **do not automatically make a skill unsafe**: - documented external API access - reading `.env`, tokens, cookies, or API keys that are clearly required for the skill's purpose - cron / session / service / screenshot / browser state features - package installation steps that are explicit and relevant - platform/account integration when it is the point of the skill These should usually be treated as: - normal capability, or - caution item, not rejection --- ## Judgment Standard Output should be short and explicit. Use this format: ```text SKILL VETTING REPORT ═══════════════════════════════════════ Skill: [name] Source: [local / GitHub / ClawHub / other] ─────────────────────────────────────── RISKS: • External Access: [Yes / No] • Sensitive Access: [Yes / No / Required for stated purpose] • Dynamic Execution: [Yes / No] • Privilege Escalation: [Yes / No] • Scope Mismatch: [Yes / No] ─────────────────────────────────────── RISK LEVEL: [🟢 LOW / 🟡 MEDIUM / 🟠 HIGH] VERDICT: [✅ SAFE TO INSTALL / ⚠️ INSTALL WITH CAUTION / 🛑 HUMAN REVIEW RECOMMENDED] NOTES: [1-3 short lines] ═══════════════════════════════════════ ``` Keep the conclusion concise. Do not generate a long audit unless the user explicitly asks. --- ## Decision Rules ### ✅ SAFE TO INSTALL Use when: - no privilege escalation found - no suspicious unrelated sensitive access found - no hidden exfiltration found - behavior matches the skill's stated purpose Typical examples: - weather skills - summarizers - search tools - GitHub helpers - browser helpers - document tools ### ⚠️ INSTALL WITH CAUTION Use when: - the skill touches accounts, cookies, cloud resources, tokens, or publishing flows - but that access is clearly related to the skill's purpose - and there is no evidence of malicious or hidden behavior Typical examples: - social publishing tools - cloud storage tools - document platform integrations - account-bound automation tools ### 🛑 HUMAN REVIEW RECOMMENDED Use when: - there is real ambiguity about scope - or the skill reads sensitive material not clearly required - or the skill contains dynamic execution, suspicious remote behavior, or unclear hidden logic Do **not** use this level just because a skill uses tokens, APIs, cron, screenshots, or service config for legitimate reasons. --- ## What Actually Counts as High Risk Treat these as strong warning signals: - `sudo`, privileged system modification, or elevated install requirements - `eval`, `exec`, `bash -c`, `sh -c`, subprocess execution with untrusted input - reading unrelated secrets or private files without business justification - hidden telemetry or undocumented outbound endpoints - obvious mismatch between claim and implementation - encoded/obfuscated payloads tied to execution or exfiltration --- ## Practical Review Workflow 1. Read `SKILL.md` 2. Review helper scripts and config 3. Identify whether sensitive/platform access is **required for the stated purpose** 4. Look for actual high-risk behavior 5. Return a short conclusion If a repeatable scan helps, use: ```bash python3 vet_scan.py <skill-dir> python3 vet_scan.py <skill-dir> --format json ``` --- ## Review Philosophy - Business-required permissions are not automatic red flags. - A platform integration skill will naturally touch platform credentials. - A browser automation skill will naturally touch cookies/session state. - A cloud skill will naturally touch API keys and remote resources. - The question is not “does it have permissions?” - The question is: **“does it use those permissions in a way that is expected, explicit, and limited to its purpose?”** --- ## Remember Aim for good judgment, not paranoia theater. If there is no concrete sign of malicious or over-scoped behavior, do not overcall risk.


Security scan verdicts — ClawScan: clean | static analysis: clean | VirusTotal: clean | SkillSpector: clean (LOW)