Back to skill

Security audit

Finishing A Development Branch

Security checks for vulnerabilities and agentic risk

Overview

The skill is purpose-aligned for finishing a Git branch, but its inconsistent worktree cleanup instructions could cause a user's worktree to be deleted unexpectedly after creating a PR.

Review the cleanup behavior before installing. This skill is not trying to exfiltrate data or install persistence, but it should be corrected so PR creation clearly preserves the worktree unless the user explicitly asks to remove it, and any worktree deletion should require confirmation and a clean-worktree check.

Vulnerability Patterns
  • Skill Instruction HijackingAlters the agent's session goals or safety constraints when the skill loads
  • Agent Memory PoisoningWrites attacker-controlled rules into memory that affect later sessions
  • Remote Payload Retrieval and ExecutionFetches external code whose behavior can change after review
  • Embedded Malicious CodeShips malicious scripts inside the skill and executes them locally
  • Unauthorized Access and Privilege EscalationObtains permissions beyond the task's legitimate needs
Vulnerability Patterns
  • Excessive AgencyUnrestricted Tool Access, Autonomous Decision Making, Scope Creep
  • MCP Tool PoisoningHidden Instructions, Unicode Deception, Parameter Description Injection
  • Prompt InjectionInstruction Override, Hidden Instructions, Exfiltration Commands
  • Data ExfiltrationExternal Transmission, Env Variable Harvesting, File System Enumeration
  • Privilege EscalationExcessive Permissions, Sudo/Root Execution, Credential Access
Findings (5)

Missing User Warnings

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
93% confidence
Finding

The skill instructs git worktree remove <worktree-path> with no warning that this removes the linked working directory from the filesystem and may fail or behave destructively depending on local state. In a branch-finishing workflow, users may still expect the worktree directory to remain available after merge/PR steps, so silent removal creates risk of data loss or confusion.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Intent-Code Divergence

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
97% confidence
Finding

The skill gives conflicting instructions for Option 2: Step 5 says to clean up the worktree for Options 1, 2, and 4, while the Quick Reference says Option 2 should keep the worktree. In an automation context, contradictory destructive guidance can cause unintended removal of a developer's worktree, disrupting ongoing work and potentially deleting uncommitted filesystem contents in that worktree.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Intent-Code Divergence

Medium
Category
Not specified by scanner
Confidence
98% confidence
Finding

The 'Common Mistakes' and 'Always' sections instruct cleanup only for Options 1 and 4, which contradicts Step 5's directive to also clean up for Option 2. This inconsistency increases the chance that an agent will choose the more destructive interpretation and remove a worktree after pushing a PR, even though the surrounding guidance implies it should be preserved.

Content

No source excerpt is available for this finding.

Autonomous Decision Making

Medium
Category
Excessive Agency
Confidence
75% confidence
Finding

Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.

Content

Scanner excerpt · SKILL.md (reported line 175)May include surrounding context.

md
- **Problem:** Remove worktree when might need it (Option 2, 3)
- **Fix:** Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4

**No confirmation for discard**
- **Problem:** Accidentally delete work
- **Fix:** Require typed "discard" confirmation

Autonomous Decision Making

Medium
Category
Excessive Agency
Confidence
75% confidence
Finding

Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.

Content

Scanner excerpt · SKILL.md (reported line 184)May include surrounding context.

md
**Never:**
- Proceed with failing tests
- Merge without verifying tests on result
- Delete work without confirmation
- Force-push without explicit request

**Always:**

Static analysis

No suspicious patterns detected.