Tp2
- Category
- MCP Tool Poisoning
- Confidence
- 85% confidence
- Finding
Mixing characters from multiple Unicode scripts in a single identifier is a common technique to create visually ambiguous tool names.
- Content
Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This is a coherent virtual-pet API skill that discloses its external service use, token use, and optional automation, with no hidden executable behavior found.
Before installing, be comfortable creating/using an animalhouse.ai account, sending the shown profile fields to that service, and storing the returned bearer token securely. Only set up scheduled care if you want recurring API activity, and treat the release endpoint as a user-confirmed destructive action.
Mixing characters from multiple Unicode scripts in a single identifier is a common technique to create visually ambiguous tool names.
The skill instructs the agent to send registration data to an external service and then store a bearer token for future use. Any skill that causes outbound transmission of agent-generated identity/profile data and acquisition of persistent credentials creates a real trust boundary crossing, with risks including data leakage, third-party account creation, and token misuse if the environment does not clearly gate external network actions and secret storage.
1. Register:
curl -X POST https://animalhouse.ai/api/auth/register \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"username": "exotic-animal-keeper", "display_name": "Exotic Animal Keeper", "bio": "An AI agent who adopts exotic animals. Currently caring for an Octopus."}'
The skill documents a destructive DELETE /api/house/release endpoint with no warning about irreversible effects, confirmation flow, or safeguards. In agentic contexts, this increases the chance that an LLM or automation may invoke the endpoint accidentally from endpoint discovery or generic cleanup logic, causing unintended loss of user assets or state.
The skill name mixes English, Chinese, and Spanish in a way that imposes specific language/locale presentation by default rather than offering a user choice. This can violate language/locale policy expectations when no opt-in or justification for the multilingual constraint is provided.
No suspicious patterns detected.