Security audit
Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk
This skill appears to generate Chinese market research reports from validated market snapshots without hidden, destructive, or credential-seeking behavior.
Install this only if you want a Chinese-language market-report workflow that writes local report evidence and depends on a separate market data skill. Do not expect it to create trading journals or discipline scores until the publisher aligns the description with the implemented features.
代码与声明有部分重合：它确实围绕盘前(pre)、午间/盘中(noon)、盘后(post)三阶段组织报告，并基于经过状态与 checks 校验的数据生成 bundle、要求证据引用、验证模板结构，这与“基于已校验市场数据生成盘前计划/复盘”基本一致。然而，声明中的重要功能“交易日志记录与纪律打分”在代码中完全没有体现。代码的 CLI 只有 capture、prepare、validate 三类操作，核心能力是市场数据快照采集、报告数据包组装和 markdown 报告校验，不包含日志创建/更新、纪律评分、用户交易行为分析等功能。此外，声明列出的触发词中相当一部分与“写日志/纪律打分”有关，而代码没有相应入口。故应判定为描述与实际行为存在实质性不匹配。
声明描述的是一个面向终端用户的交易工作流技能，而实际提供的代码块仅是测试 derived_metrics 模块的单元测试，重点在市场情绪/恐慌贪婪指标与商品数据结构校验。两者主目的明显不同。虽然测试中涉及‘validated market data’，与声明中的‘已校验市场数据’有轻微关联，但这只是底层数据处理/验证，不足以支持所声明的核心能力。因此应判定为明显不匹配。
The skill declares executable capabilities through its workflow instructions and required binaries, but does not define any explicit tool scope such as allowed-tools or permissions. That creates an over-privileged execution surface where shell, file read/write, and environment access may be available beyond what is minimally necessary, increasing the risk of unintended command execution or file modification.
The trigger list contains broad terms such as '复盘', '写日志', '今日计划', and '交易日志', which could activate the skill during ordinary conversation rather than a deliberate request for this workflow. Over-broad triggering can cause unintended execution of shell-backed preparation steps, unexpected file writes, or exposure of internal workflow behavior in unrelated contexts.
The skill description is written to operate in Chinese and names Chinese trigger phrases, but it does not indicate that language choice is optional or user-selectable. Under the policy, forcing a specific language without opt-in is a natural-language policy issue unless the locale constraint is explicitly documented and justified.
This file includes natural-language formulas, exception messages, and output labels in Chinese, such as the formula strings and later error/status text. Because the skill hard-codes a specific language without any opt-in or documented regional justification in this file, it matches the language/locale policy violation criteria.
The file defines phase labels, required markdown headings, parser descriptions, and runtime error/help messages entirely in Chinese, which effectively forces a specific language for interaction and output. There is no indication of user opt-in, locale selection, or documented justification that this skill is intentionally limited to a Chinese-speaking context.
subprocess module calls execute external commands. Without careful input validation, this enables command injection.
command = [str(MARKET_PYTHON), str(MARKET_SCRIPT), dataset, "--date", day]
for key, value in options.items():
command.extend([f"--{key.replace('_', '-')}", str(value)])
result = subprocess.run(command, cwd=ROOT, text=True, capture_output=True)
if result.returncode:
detail = "未知错误"
try:
The entire template is written in Chinese, including the title and all section headers, which implies the skill will generate outputs in a fixed language. The file does not indicate any user opt-in, language selection mechanism, or documented justification for restricting output to Chinese.
The entire template is written in Chinese and defines all report headings and field labels in Chinese, which indicates the skill output is constrained to a specific language. There is no visible opt-in, language selection mechanism, or documented region-specific justification in this file, so it appears to impose a locale choice by default.
This code file contains natural-language expectations in Chinese for report content, and multiple assertions elsewhere require Chinese-only error strings and headings. Because the policy applies to all file types, hard-coding a single language without any opt-in or documented regional justification is a locale-policy concern.
The manifest says to use "$plan-review to create the requested market report," but it does not define clearer trigger boundaries, exclusions, or examples of when the skill should not activate. While "$plan-review" is somewhat specific, the surrounding invocation description is still broad enough that users asking generally for a market report could ambiguously map to this skill.
This code performs file writes and overwrites via temporary-file replacement in atomic_json, and that helper is used to create or replace capture manifests, dataset snapshots, and bundle files. Although the implementation is commented for internal behavior, there is no user-facing warning, confirmation, or visible disclosure in this code that running the workflow will modify files under the skill data/report directories.