Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This is a text-only workplace coaching skill with broad routing and China-specific advice, but no unsafe code, persistence, credential access, or hidden data flow was found.
Install this if you want a Chinese-language workplace coaching assistant based on classic management books. Be aware it may activate for broad work, productivity, career, or communication questions and may frame advice through Chinese workplace norms; for legal rights, harassment, health, finance, or company-policy disputes, rely on qualified professional advice instead of this skill alone.
The skill explicitly says it should be used for '任何职场问题' and also for many adjacent topics like productivity, strategy, influence, and workplace relationships. This creates an overbroad activation surface that can cause the skill to hijack unrelated conversations, override more appropriate domain-specific skills, or inject culturally specific advice where the user did not ask for it.
The trigger list contains many generic single-word terms in both Chinese and English, such as '管理', '沟通', '战略', 'career', and 'productivity'. These are likely to appear in normal conversation outside this skill's intended niche, increasing accidental invocation and making prompt-routing less reliable.
The '何时使用' section instructs proactive use across broad emotional, advisory, and planning situations, including anxiety and interpersonal conflict, without clear boundaries. In practice this can cause the skill to engage in contexts better handled by specialized legal, HR, mental-health, or neutral assistant behavior.
The response-style section mandates a specific Chinese-language tone and a culturally specific '中国式分寸' framing without checking the user's preferred language or cultural context. This can lead to misalignment, exclusion of non-Chinese users, and advice framed around assumptions that may be inappropriate in other jurisdictions or workplaces.
The file’s headings, instructions, and guidance are all presented in Chinese, but there is no natural-language indication that the skill is intended only for Chinese-speaking users or that users may choose another language. This can violate language/locale policy requirements when a skill effectively forces one language without user opt-in.
The skill is explicitly framed around '中国式管理' and the metadata instructs broad automatic use for workplace, leadership, strategy, and relationship questions without requiring user opt-in or checking cultural fit. This can bias advice toward a specific cultural and hierarchical worldview, causing misleading or inapplicable guidance for users from other locales or for contexts where legal, organizational, or ethical norms differ.
The trigger '职场' is extremely broad and likely to appear in many ordinary discussions about work. This raises the chance of accidental activation and unnecessary routing into this skill even when the user needs a different type of help.
The trigger '领导' is ambiguous and can refer to a boss, leadership generally, or unrelated social discussion. Such a short keyword makes invocation noisy and can misroute user requests.
The trigger '管理' is a generic term used across many domains, not just workplace coaching. This increases false positives and weakens safe skill selection.
The trigger '经理' is short and may appear in many contexts including titles, bios, and general discussion. On its own it is too weak to safely select this skill.
The trigger '主管' is a common workplace noun that may appear in many unrelated requests. Standalone role labels are poor selectors and can cause spurious activation.
The trigger '专注' is a broad productivity term used far beyond workplace management. It could activate the skill for general study, wellness, or lifestyle conversations.
The trigger '效率' is a generic term common in many domains. This can cause the skill to activate when users are discussing technical performance, study habits, or unrelated optimization tasks.
The trigger '效能' is broad and context-agnostic. It is insufficiently precise for safe routing because it can describe personal, organizational, or system effectiveness.
The trigger '发展' is extremely generic and appears in many conversations unrelated to workplace coaching. This makes it a poor standalone activation keyword.
Although '跳槽' is more specific than many other triggers, it can still appear in broad employment or legal discussions where this coaching skill may not be appropriate. Without context checks, it may intercept sensitive HR or labor-rights questions.
The trigger '转行' can appear in educational, financial, or life-planning contexts outside this skill's intended management framework. By itself it is not a reliable selector.
The trigger '晋升' is a common career term that may be used in broad HR, compensation, or legal fairness contexts. Standalone use risks misrouting sensitive workplace issues into generic coaching advice.
The trigger '升职' is common and context-sensitive. On its own it may activate the skill in cases better handled by HR policy or legal guidance.
The trigger '同事' is too generic because it appears in many everyday stories about work and social interactions. This raises accidental-invocation risk.
The trigger '上司' is a broad role term that may arise in complaints, legal issues, or harassment contexts. Without boundaries, the skill may provide generic coaching where escalation is needed.
The trigger '下属' is a generic role word and may match many unrelated narratives. Alone, it is too weak and broad for precise routing.
The trigger '沟通' is highly generic and spans personal, technical, educational, and workplace contexts. This broadness significantly increases false activations.
The trigger '说服' is a common verb that can appear in many contexts unrelated to leadership or workplace advice. This makes it too noisy for safe activation.
The trigger '授权' is somewhat domain-specific but still broad enough to appear in legal, software, or administrative contexts. It lacks sufficient contextual grounding.
No suspicious patterns detected.
