Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This is a local HR statutory-cost checker that reads user-provided materials and prints results, with no evidence of network use, persistence, or hidden execution.
Install only if you are comfortable giving the skill local access to the HR/finance materials you explicitly pass to it. Treat it as an arithmetic and reconciliation aid, not legal, tax, audit, or filing advice, and review the reported checks_not_run/sub_checks_not_run before relying on a clean result.
The finding indicates the free version's documented scope and output format materially differ from actual behavior, including missing declared checks and extra undocumented checks. While this is not code execution risk, it is a trust and integrity issue: users may make compliance decisions based on misunderstood coverage and incomplete evidence trails.
The finding indicates the free version's documented scope and output format materially differ from actual behavior, including missing declared checks and extra undocumented checks. While this is not code execution risk, it is a trust and integrity issue: users may make compliance decisions based on misunderstood coverage and incomplete evidence trails.
The finding indicates the free version's documented scope and output format materially differ from actual behavior, including missing declared checks and extra undocumented checks. While this is not code execution risk, it is a trust and integrity issue: users may make compliance decisions based on misunderstood coverage and incomplete evidence trails.
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --sample # 单公司样例（内置，3 项全跑）
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --sample # 单公司样例（内置，3 项全跑）
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --sample # 单公司样例（内置，3 项全跑）
Referenced artifact was not completely inspected
node scripts/run.mjs --sample # 单公司样例（内置，3 项全跑）
The manifest states the free version executes 3 items and explicitly includes 残疾人就业保障金核对. However, this module lists both 残保金勾稽 and 残保金计提与应缴不符检测 under CHECKS_WITHHELD, and the run function never executes disability-fund validation logic, only union-related and generic table checks.
This code embeds its skill description, required-field guidance, and user-facing messages entirely in Chinese, and the runtime outputs later in the file follow the same pattern. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without user opt-in is a natural-language locale violation unless clearly documented as a justified region-specific constraint.
The file’s natural-language comments, user-facing messages, sample input, advice, disclaimer, and result note are all written in Chinese, and there is no indication that another language is supported or that the user can opt in to this locale. Under the policy rule, forcing a specific language without user choice is a natural-language policy violation.
The manifest says the free edition only performs 3 statutory checks: 残疾人就业保障金核对、工会经费计提与上缴核对、职工福利费与教育经费限额核对. This file's own documentation and exported scope show the free tier executes 6 checks, including 合计行复核、重复期间检测、空白与占位符检测、工资总额为负或为零检测, which go beyond the manifest's stated free-scope description.
The header comment says 免费档执行 6 项, while the skill manifest says the free package only executes 3 items, and specifically frames the free scope around three statutory categories. This is an active documentation contradiction about user-visible scope, not a mere omission.
The code advertises 6 free checks and references the 2% union-fee statutory limit, but the implementation only runs welfare-limit, education-limit, totals, duplicate, blank, and negative-value checks. This mismatch can cause users to rely on a control that is not actually enforced, leading to undetected compliance errors and incorrect downstream conclusions.
The disclaimer states the tool checks '实际发生额 vs 限额', but no code performs that comparison in this free version. In a financial/compliance skill, overstating what validations were performed can mislead operators into trusting a result that omitted a material control, allowing excess amounts or required tax adjustments to go unnoticed.
The file uses Chinese for the primary display name, summary, and description fields, and the main body of the README is also Chinese. Although English metadata exists, the skill does not explicitly offer a user-facing language/locale choice or opt-in, which can be interpreted as forcing a specific language experience.
The file’s natural-language guidance, warnings, labels, and user-facing messages are entirely in Chinese, with no indication that the skill supports other languages or that Chinese is a required locale. This can violate a language/locale policy when users are not offered a choice or explicit opt-in.