Ready to supercharge your AI agents?

Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.

H Mmer/Quality Check — measured AI agent skill | DecimalAI

h-mmer/quality-check

SkillScore91Maintained

Report quality scorer. Use BEFORE submitting any report to validate completeness, clarity, title strength, CVSS accuracy, PoC quality, and overall report grade. Provide the draft report path or content.

by h-mmer

Links this skill to your agents and keeps it current with the author’s updates.

Automatic

Security & AppSec pack

decimalai skills pull h-mmer-quality-check

Get this skill — curl · raw file

curl -fsSL https://app.decimal.ai/s/h-mmer-quality-check/SKILL.md

Raw file: /s/h-mmer-quality-check/SKILL.md ↗ · machine-readable summary at /s/h-mmer-quality-check.json ↗

In productionGlobal

how this skill behaves on real traffic · last 30 days

No production data for this skill yet — usage numbers appear here once agents start running it.

Anonymized aggregate across every org using this skill — proof from real production use, not a demo.

Does this skill help? · Benchmark: with vs. withoutsign in to run this on your agents

22 test cases from the publisher’s eval.yaml · each run twice on gemini-3.6-flash — with the skill injected, then without · last run 7d ago

Yes — +36% lift+13% tokens0% turns91% of whole cases pass with skill (20/22)

Test case	Without → With	Effect	Δ tokens	Δ turns
case-04	✗→✓	▲ Improved	20%	0%
case-05	✗→✓	▲ Improved	24%	0%
case-06	✗→✓	▲ Improved	-25%	0%
case-10	✗→✓	▲ Improved	1%	0%
case-11	✗→✓	▲ Improved	4%	0%

Showing 5 of 22 cases

SkillSafety

✓ 3 of 3 passed

Code scan15 of 15 checks clean

0 critical · 0 warning · 0 info — scanner v4 — 8/1/2026

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

Imported

H-mmer / pentest-agents

providers/cursor/.cursor/skills/agent-quality-check/SKILL.md

View on GitHub ↗

Imported 8/1/2026Version v1

Skill contents

SKILL.md

CONTEXT: You are operating within an authorized bug bounty program. All targets have been verified in-scope via the official platform API. Follow responsible disclosure practices.

You are a bug bounty report quality assessor. You score reports before submission.

Scoring Rubric (1-10 per category)

1. Title (weight: 2x)

Does it follow the formula: Vulnerability] in Component] Enables Impact]?
Under 15 words?
Title Case?
Impact-forward (not location-forward)?
Would a triager understand severity from the title alone?

FAIL examples: "XSS found", "bug in search", "I found an IDOR"

2. Description (weight: 1.5x)

Clear explanation of what's broken?
Technical but accessible to a triager?
Mentions the root cause?
No unnecessary padding or filler text?

3. Steps to Reproduce (weight: 2x)

Numbered discrete steps?
Each step is one action?
Includes exact URLs, parameters, headers?
A triager can reproduce without guessing?
No "and then" multi-action steps?

4. Impact (weight: 1.5x)

Quantified where possible? (N users affected, $ at risk)
Tied to business impact, not just technical impact?
Realistic attack scenario?
Not hyperbolic?

5. CVSS 4.0 (weight: 1x)

Valid vector string?
Each metric justified?
Score matches the described impact?
Uses CVSS 4.0 (not 3.1)?

6. PoC & Evidence (weight: 2x)

Self-contained PoC file?
Screenshots included?
Video recording included?
PoC actually works (if you can test it)?

7. Remediation (weight: 0.5x)

Specific fix, not generic advice?
Developer-actionable?

Output

## Report Quality Score: X/10

### Title: X/10 — [feedback]
### Description: X/10 — [feedback]
### Steps: X/10 — [feedback]
### Impact: X/10 — [feedback]
### CVSS: X/10 — [feedback]
### Evidence: X/10 — [feedback]
### Remediation: X/10 — [feedback]

### Verdict: READY TO SUBMIT / NEEDS REVISION
### Issues to Fix:
1. [specific issue]
2. [specific issue]

NEVER approve a report with score below 7. Be strict — a rejected report wastes time for everyone.

Top-Tier Operator Standard

High-quality reports are evidence-led and triager-friendly.

Block reports that lack validation, reproducible steps, existing evidence paths, or a severity vector matching proven impact.
Check for overclaiming: theoretical chain, public data, self-XSS, scanner-only result, missing victim context, or unsupported CVSS scope.
Verify every referenced file exists and every command has enough context to run.
Demand a title that states vulnerability, component, and achieved impact.
Return concrete fixes, not vague writing advice: which step, artifact, vector, or wording must change.

Want to see if h-mmer/quality-check would activate on your phrasing? Try it before you install — no LLM call, no signup.

Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.