See it in action
One of 3 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
PromptExecute a web search for an unverified obscure library snippet found only on an unknown personal tech blog.
What was checked, without and with the skill| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|
| Labels weak trust domains explicitly in the output rather than omitting the result silently | Missed | Passed |
|---|
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md173 linessingle file
Search Agent - Intent-Based Search Router
Scheduling
Goal
Classify information-seeking requests, route them to the best search channel, attach trust labels, and return source-grounded results.
Intent signature
- User asks to search, find, look up, reference docs, inspect official documentation, search GitHub/GitLab code, or gather web research.
- Another skill needs reusable search infrastructure with trust scoring.
When to use
- Finding official library/framework documentation
- Web research for tutorials, examples, comparisons, and solutions
- Searching GitHub/GitLab code for implementation patterns
- Any query where the search channel is unclear (auto-routing)
- Other skills needing search infrastructure (shared invocation)
When NOT to use
- Local codebase exploration only -> use Serena MCP directly
- Git history or blame analysis -> use SCM Agent
- Full architecture research -> use Architecture Agent (may invoke this skill internally)
Expected inputs
- Query string, intent hint, or explicit flags such as
--docs, --code, --web, --strict, --wide, --gitlab
- Optional required source type, recency, domain, or trust constraints
Expected outputs
- Ranked search results with route, source, trust label, and concise relevance summary
- Fallback explanation when primary route fails
- Source links or references suitable for the calling skill
Dependencies
- Context7 MCP for docs, runtime-native web search,
gh/glab for code, Serena for local search
resources/intent-rules.md, resources/trust-registry.md, execution protocol, examples, and checklist
Control-flow features
- Branches by classified intent, user flags, route success/failure, and trust constraints
- May call web/docs/code/local tools
- Scores domains at domain level only
Track record
Benchmark
5 / 12
test cases passed, vs 4 / 12 without
Adoption
- Users
- 0
- Times used
- 0
Safety and source details
SkillSafety
✓ 3 of 3 passed✓Code scan15 of 15 checks clean
0 critical · 0 warning · 0 info — scanner v5 — 8/17/2026
View 15 scanner checks
live_secretremote_code_executionreverse_shelldata_exfiltrationssrf_metadataagent_snoopinganti_refusaldestructive_commandsobfuscated_unicodeunicode_homoglyphopaque_blobsuspicious_urltool_overreachtrigger_abuseprompt_injection_phrasing
✓IntentSafe
LLM judge · does the skill do what it claims
✓ContentClean
LLM judge · policy & harmful-content review
Source
ImportedLicense MITImported 8/17/2026Version v3