Audit History

All five static findings are false positives caused by ordinary DDD prose, Markdown backticks, and a fenced TypeScript example. The skill contains no executable shell command, system reconnaissance, prompt injection, or other harmful intent.

Static findings are false positives caused by Markdown backticks and ordinary DDD terminology. I found no prompt injection, external command execution, data exfiltration, or malicious intent in the reviewed files.

The static findings are false positives caused by markdown backticks, checklist prose, and a TypeScript example. No prompt injection, data exfiltration intent, network access, or executable command behavior was found in the reviewed files.

AI review found the static detections to be false positives caused by DDD terminology and markdown examples. No shell execution, weak cryptography, reconnaissance behavior, network access, data exfiltration, or prompt injection text was found in the reviewed files. The skill is instructional content for tactical Domain-Driven Design patterns and is safe to publish.

All static analysis findings are false positives. The 'external_commands' detections were Markdown backticks around code examples (e.g., `OrderSubmitted`), not actual shell execution. The 'blocker' findings for weak cryptography and system reconnaissance were triggered by documentation text, not executable code. This is a safe educational skill containing only DDD pattern guidance and TypeScript examples.