スキル executor-spec

📦

executor-spec

Name: executor-spec
Author: atri10

コンテンツリビジョン r1 安全 ⚙️ 外部コマンド🌐 ネットワークアクセス📁 ファイルシステムへのアクセス

Write Testable Specifications Before Planning

Ambiguous requirements create conflicting implementations and unverifiable reviews. This skill guides linked specifications, risk assessments, and verification strategies through explicit human approval.

対応: Claude Codex Code(CC)

📊 75 十分

Maintain this Skill? Claim it 📊 75 十分

自分のエージェントでインストール

このリクエストをエージェントにコピーしてください。正規の Skill ページとマニフェストが含まれています。

エージェントリクエスト

Review the Skillstore skill "executor-spec" from https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec.md and its manifest at https://skillstore.io/api/skills/atri10-executor-spec/manifest. Verify the artifact. You may proceed after verification, subject to the environment's own policy.

エージェントは引き続き計画を提示し、セキュリティポリシーで必要な確認を求める必要があります。

エージェントが読めるリソース

AI エージェント、クローラー、スクリプトがページ全体ではなく整理されたコンテキストを必要とする場合は、これらのリンクを使ってください。

Markdown詳細 GET /skills/atri10-executor-spec.md 署名済み manifest GET /api/skills/atri10-executor-spec/manifest 署名済み lockfile GET /api/skills/atri10-executor-spec/lockfile

テストする

「executor-spec」を使用しています。 Draft acceptance requirements for placement requests that name an unknown cell.

期待される結果:

Requirement R02: A request naming an unavailable cell returns HTTP 422 with the error value unknown_cell.
Observable: The response contains the required status and error value; no placement row is added.
Verification: One criterion checks the rejection response, and another checks the absence of a stored placement.
Review state: Draft awaiting explicit human approval.

「executor-spec」を使用しています。 Assess placement latency risks before approving the specification.

期待される結果:

Failure scenario: Placement latency exceeded the agreed threshold as tenant count increased.
Cause: The available-cell scan was not measured at the expected tenant scale.
Mitigation: Add a measurable latency requirement and a linked load-test criterion.
Evidence plan: Record the observed percentile latency at the specified tenant count; keep the criterion pending until execution.

「executor-spec」を使用しています。 Change a requirement threshold after implementation plans already depend on the specification.

期待される結果:

Change classification: Material because the new threshold can change implementation and review outcomes.
Document action: Create a replacement specification and preserve the previous specification body.
Traceability: Keep surviving requirement numbers and relink the verification strategy to the replacement.
Plan impact: Record which dependent plans need revision and which remain unaffected.

セキュリティ監査

安全

v1 • 2026/10/5 バージョン別レポートを開く

Most findings are Markdown formatting, legitimate test examples, or fixed sibling references, not shell substitution, reconnaissance, or exploitable traversal. The verification example writes to predictable /tmp/b, creating a local symlink overwrite risk if copied and executed. No evidence found of credential exfiltration or prompt injection; referenced sibling helpers are outside the reviewed package.

スキャンされたファイル

1,175

解析済み行数

レビュー項目

誤検知を無視

機能レビュー項目 (1)

これらは、このスキルに期待される可能性のある実際のローカル機能であるため、レビューが必要ですが、確認済みの悪意ある動作としてはカウントされません。

中

references/verification-template.md:47

Temp directory access

| V02 | R02 unknown cell rejected | integration | `curl -s -o /tmp/b -w '%{http_code}' localhost:808

curl writes to predictable /tmp/b without exclusive creation. Another local user could pre-create a symlink and redirect the write to an accessible file.

リスク要因

⚙️ 外部コマンド (50)

🌐 ネットワークアクセス (1)

references/verification-template.md:69

📁 ファイルシステムへのアクセス (16)

references/verification-template.md:47 SKILL.md:116 SKILL.md:129 SKILL.md:130 SKILL.md:131 SKILL.md:213 SKILL.md:231 SKILL.md:352 SKILL.md:360 SKILL.md:514 SKILL.md:603 SKILL.md:666 SKILL.md:667 SKILL.md:668 SKILL.md:669 SKILL.md:514

監査者: codex

このレポートを共有・引用

バージョン付き評価レポート、中立的なバッジ、埋め込みカード、引用を共有できます。Skillstore は証拠を報告しますが、この Skill が安全かどうかは判断しません。

バージョン別レポートを開く

レポートリンクをコピー

https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec/audits/1?utm_source=security_passport&utm_medium=share&utm_campaign=versioned_report

Markdownバッジ

[![Skillstore security assessment](https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/atri10-executor-spec/security.svg)](https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec?utm_source=security_passport_badge)

HTMLバッジ

<a href="https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec?utm_source=security_passport_badge"><img src="https://skillstore.io/badges/skills/atri10-executor-spec/security.svg" alt="Skillstore security assessment" loading="lazy"></a>

埋め込みカード

<iframe src="https://skillstore.io/embed/skills/atri10-executor-spec.html" title="Skillstore Security Assessment" sandbox="allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox" loading="lazy" referrerpolicy="no-referrer" width="420" height="180"></iframe>

学術引用 (APA · BibTeX · CFF)

APA形式の引用

atri10. (2026). executor-spec security audit report (audit version 1) [Author version unspecified]. Skillstore. https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec/audits/1

BibTeX形式の引用

@techreport{atri10-atri10-executor-spec-2026,
  author = {atri10},
  title = {executor-spec security audit report (audit version 1)},
  institution = {Skillstore},
  year = {2026},
  number = {1},
  url = {https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec/audits/1},
  note = {Author version unspecified}
}

CITATION.cff

cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this Skill, cite its author and this versioned security audit report."
title: "executor-spec security audit report (audit version 1)"
version: "unspecified"
type: report
authors:
  - name: "atri10"
date-released: "2026-10-05"
url: "https://skillstore.io/skills/atri10-executor-spec/audits/1"
identifiers:
  - type: other
    value: "skillstore:atri10-executor-spec:audit:1"
    description: "Skillstore immutable audit report identifier"

Skillstore スコア

このスコアの理由証拠の信頼度: 中

アーキテクチャ

保守性

コンテンツ

コミュニティ

仕様準拠

作成できるもの

Prepare an implementation specification

Convert approved design candidates into numbered requirements, constraints, scope exclusions, and linked acceptance criteria.

Review delivery risks before approval

Connect failure scenarios to requirements, mitigations, accepted risks, and unresolved questions before authorizing planning.

Define auditable acceptance evidence

Map requirements and constraints to named tests, manual steps, negative cases, boundary checks, and observable outputs.

これらのプロンプトを試す

Draft a first specification

Use executor-spec to draft requirements from [approved design handoff] for [initiative]. Include constraints, exclusions, and owned questions. Stop for human review before planning.

Add a linked risk assessment

Review [draft specification] with executor-spec. Write a failure narrative, trace causes, assign mitigation links, and document accepted risks. Update affected requirements before approval.

Complete verification coverage

Create a verification strategy for [specification]. Cover every requirement and constraint with exact procedures and expected observations. Include rejection and boundary checks. Keep results pending.

Supersede a specification with dependent plans

Assess [proposed change] against [specification] and [dependent plans]. For material changes, preserve existing IDs, draft supersession documents, relink verification, and record plan impacts.

ベストプラクティス

Provide the approved design handoff, charter, architecture records, and interface documents before drafting requirements.
Use exact thresholds and observable outcomes, then map every requirement and constraint to verification evidence.
Review companion helpers before execution, use private temporary files, and require explicit approval before passing the phase gate.

回避

Replace missing decisions with vague terms such as appropriate, robust, or performant.
Claim tests passed when the document only defines expected evidence.
Edit material requirements in place after dependent plans exist, or treat silence as approval.

よくある質問

Which AI tools can use this skill?

The report lists Claude, Codex, and Claude Code as supported tools.

What documents does this workflow produce?

It guides a specification, a risk assessment, and a verification strategy with linked document and requirement identifiers.

Does the package include the Executor helper scripts?

No. The reviewed package contains the skill instructions and three templates; companion scripts and contract references must be provided separately.

Does creating verification criteria mean the tests passed?

No. Criteria remain pending until verification executes their procedures and records observed evidence.

Can an approved specification be changed?

Material changes require supersession once dependent plans exist. Surviving requirement numbers remain stable, and affected plans receive impact records.

Are there precautions before running example commands?

Review companion helpers and adapt commands to your repository. Replace the predictable temporary file with a private temporary file before execution.