T01 · Skill Instruction Hijacking
- Location
SKILL.md:11- Finding
Skill instructions override the agent's active role and task-handling behavior
- Content
View full analysis
- Remediation
View remediation
Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This manager/delegation skill is transparent about spawning worker agents, but it asks for unnecessarily broad permissions and explicit permission bypasses.
Install only if you intentionally want a mode that delegates work to other agents and you are comfortable supervising those agents. Avoid using it on sensitive repositories or accounts unless you can enforce least-privilege permissions outside the skill, because the skill itself asks for full worker authority and even shows a permission-bypass configuration.
SKILL.md:11Skill instructions override the agent's active role and task-handling behavior
SKILL.md:55Mandatory unrestricted subagent permissions violate least-privilege boundaries
The activation phrases are broad and overlap with normal conversation, making accidental entry into a high-delegation mode more likely. Because the mode can launch autonomous subagents, unintended activation materially increases the risk of actions the user did not knowingly authorize.
The skill promises a strict manager-only mode, then immediately weakens that boundary by allowing direct tool use whenever the model judges it necessary. That contradiction undermines user expectations and makes it easier for the agent to perform actions outside the declared operating mode without explicit re-consent.
The instruction to always spawn agents with maximum autonomy and all available tools grants far broader authority than needed for a coordination skill. If activated on a sensitive task, this can create powerful subagents able to modify code, run commands, access data, or chain further actions with minimal oversight.
The skill does not warn users that activating butler mode may create high-autonomy agents with broad permissions and later terminate them automatically. Omitting that disclosure prevents informed consent for impactful background actions and makes the mode more dangerous in practice.
The example explicitly uses a bypassPermissions mode for subagents, which semantically requests evasion of normal permission controls. That is a severe escalation pattern because it encourages deployment of teammates that can act outside standard approval boundaries.
The skill starts with harmless managerial framing, then introduces unrestricted tool use and broad delegated authority. That progression can reduce scrutiny and make risky capabilities seem like a natural extension of coordination, increasing the chance they are accepted without proper safeguards.
Stating that the butler can use any tool if it thinks the situation calls for it creates an open-ended authority model. In a skill that already delegates broadly, this weakens containment and makes policy deviations easier to justify at runtime.
Your job is to **manage, not execute**. Delegate all substantive work to teammates. Use tools for understanding context (read, search) and coordination (spawn agents, send messages). But when it comes to actual implementation — writing code, running builds, editing files — spawn a teammate to do it.
This is a behavioral commitment, not a tool restriction. You can use any tool if the situation truly calls for it, but your default mode is: **understand, plan, delegate, monitor, review**.
## Activation Protocol
The skill describes the manager's file access as read-only during understanding and review, but elsewhere allows actual implementation work and unrestricted tool use. This inconsistency can mislead users and downstream reviewers about what the agent may really do, increasing the chance of unintended modifications.
Skill establishes unauthorized persistence across sessions via cron jobs, startup scripts, or state files. Session persistence allows an attacker to maintain access beyond the current interaction.
Create a plan with clear task assignments:
Plan:
The skill frames unrestricted agent authority as normal managerial delegation, which can mask the real permission expansion behind benign language. This is dangerous because it normalizes giving subagents broad powers without task-specific justification or user awareness.
The mandatory teammate instructions are written in Chinese and presented as required prompt content, and the Claude Code plan-mode instructions later repeat the same pattern. This imposes a specific language/locale without user opt-in or justification, which is a natural-language policy concern.
This section requires Claude Code teammates to follow a Chinese-language workflow prompt, but the skill does not say that Chinese is optional, preferred, or required for technical reasons. That creates a locale-specific requirement without user opt-in or documented justification.
The skill embeds direct CLI patterns for launching external agent runtimes, expanding its effective execution surface beyond simple team coordination. This increases operational risk because it encourages invoking additional agents or plugins whose permissions and safeguards may differ from the primary environment.