skill-creator
Guide for creating effective skills. This skill should be used when users want to create a new skill (or update an existing skill) that extends Codex's capabilities with specialized knowledge, workflows, or tool integrations.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/deonmenezes/mantishack /tmp/skill-creator && cp -r /tmp/skill-creator/codex-rs/skills/src/assets/samples/skill-creator ~/.claude/skills/skill-creatorSKILL.md
# Skill Creator
This skill provides guidance for creating effective skills.
## About Skills
Skills are modular, self-contained folders that extend Codex's capabilities by providing
specialized knowledge, workflows, and tools. Think of them as "onboarding guides" for specific
domains or tasks—they transform Codex from a general-purpose agent into a specialized agent
equipped with procedural knowledge that no model can fully possess.
### What Skills Provide
1. Specialized workflows - Multi-step procedures for specific domains
2. Tool integrations - Instructions for working with specific file formats or APIs
3. Domain expertise - Company-specific knowledge, schemas, business logic
4. Bundled resources - Scripts, references, and assets for complex and repetitive tasks
## Core Principles
### Concise is Key
The context window is a public good. Skills share the context window with everything else Codex needs: system prompt, conversation history, other Skills' metadata, and the actual user request.
**Default assumption: Codex is already very smart.** Only add context Codex doesn't already have. Challenge each piece of information: "Does Codex really need this explanation?" and "Does this paragraph justify its token cost?"
Prefer concise examples over verbose explanations.
### Set Appropriate Degrees of Freedom
Match the level of specificity to the task's fragility and variability:
**High freedom (text-based instructions)**: Use when multiple approaches are valid, decisions depend on context, or heuristics guide the approach.
**Medium freedom (pseudocode or scripts with parameters)**: Use when a preferred pattern exists, some variation is acceptable, or configuration affects behavior.
**Low freedom (specific scripts, few parameters)**: Use when operations are fragile and error-prone, consistency is critical, or a specific sequence must be followed.
Think of Codex as exploring a path: a narrow bridge with cliffs needs specific guardrails (low freedom), while an open field allows many routes (high freedom).
### Protect Validation Integrity
You may use subagents during iteration to validate whether a skill works on realistic tasks or whether a suspected problem is real. This is most useful when you want an independent pass on the skill's behavior, outputs, or failure modes after a revision. Only do this when it is possible to start new subagents.
When using subagents for validation, treat that as an evaluation surface. The goal is to learn whether the skill generalizes, not whether another agent can reconstruct the answer from leaked context.
Prefer raw artifacts such as example prompts, outputs, diffs, logs, or traces. Give the minimum task-local context needed to perform the validation. Avoid passing the intended answer, suspected bug, intended fix, or your prior conclusions unless the validation explicitly requires them.
### Anatomy of a Skill
Every skill consists of a required SKILL.md file and optional bundled resources:
```
skill-name/
├── SKILL.md (required)
│ ├── YAML frontmatter metadata (required)
│ │ ├── name: (required)
│ │ └── description: (required)
│ └── Markdown instructions (required)
├── agents/ (recommended)
│ └── openai.yaml - UI metadata for skill lists and chips
└── Bundled Resources (optional)
├── scripts/ - Executable code (Python/Bash/etc.)
├── references/ - Documentation intended to be loaded into context as needed
└── assets/ - Files used in output (templates, icons, fonts, etc.)
```
#### SKILL.md (required)
Every SKILL.md consists of:
- **Frontmatter** (YAML): Contains `name` and `description` fields. These are the only fields that Codex reads to determine when the skill gets used, thus it is very important to be clear and comprehensive in describing what the skill is, and when it should be used.
- **Body** (Markdown): Instructions and guidance for using the skill. Only loaded AFTER the skill triggers (if at all).
#### Agents metadata (recommended)
- UI-facing metadata for skill lists and chips
- Read references/openai_yaml.md before generating values and follow its descriptions and constraints
- Create: human-facing `display_name`, `short_description`, and `default_prompt` by reading the skill
- Generate deterministically by passing the values as `--interface key=value` to `scripts/generate_openai_yaml.py` or `scripts/init_skill.py`
- On updates: validate `agents/openai.yaml` still matches SKILL.md; regenerate if stale
- Only include other optional interface fields (icons, brand color) if explicitly provided
- See references/openai_yaml.md for field definitions and examples
#### Bundled Resources (optional)
##### Scripts (`scripts/`)
Executable code (Python/Bash/etc.) for tasks that require deterministic reliability or are repeatedly rewritten.
- **When to include**: When the same code is being rewritten repeatedly or deterministic reliability is needed
- **Example**: `scripts/rotate_pdf.py` for PDF rotation tasks
- **Benefits**: Token efficient, deterministic, may be executed without loading into context
- **Note**: Scripts may still need to be read by Codex for patching or environment-specific adjustments
##### References (`references/`)
Documentation and reference material intended to be loaded as needed into context to inform Codex's process and thinking.
- **When to include**: For documentation that Codex should reference while working
- **Examples**: `references/finance.md` for financial schemas, `references/mnda.md` for company NDA template, `references/policies.md` for company policies, `references/api_docs.md` for API specifications
- **Use cases**: Database schemas, API documentation, domain knowledge, company policies, detailed workflow guides
- **Benefits**: Keeps SKILL.md lean, loaded only when Codex determines it's needed
- **Best practice**: If files are large (>10k words), include grep search patterns in SKILL.md
- **Avoid duplication**: Information should live in eithUse this agent when the target is a LIVE REST or GraphQL API you are authorized to test and the question is "can I tamper request bodies, headers, ids, and tokens to read or act on data that isn't mine?" — active, request-driven abuse of the API contract, not static code review. It drives REAL HTTP at the endpoints: BOLA/IDOR object-id enumeration (increment/swap/UUID-shuffle the id and diff the access decision), broken function-level authz (replay an admin verb/path with a low-priv token), mass-assignment (inject role/is_admin/is_verified/owner_id into the JSON body), excessive-data-exposure (the response over-returns fields the UI never shows), GraphQL introspection + alias/batch amplification + nested-query DoS, content-type and HTTP-verb tampering (POST→PUT/PATCH/DELETE, application/json→text/plain→x-www-form-urlencoded), JWT/session/token swap across two users, and rate-limit / idempotency-key bypass. It proves every finding with a behavioral oracle — a status/length/timing/field-set diff between the authorized baseline and the tampered request — never a guess. Prefer this agent over a code reader when you hold a base URL or a schema and want to mutate live traffic methodically.\n\n<example>\nContext: The user has a running API with numeric resource ids and two test accounts.\nuser: "Here's our staging API at https://api.staging.acme.test and tokens for user A and user B — can user A read user B's orders?"\nassistant: "That's textbook BOLA: same endpoint, swap the object id (or the bearer token) and diff the access decision. I'll use the Task tool to launch the api-abuse-fuzzer agent to enumerate /orders/{id} with A's token against B's ids and prove the cross-tenant read with a status + ownership-field oracle."\n<agent_launch>\nDelegating to api-abuse-fuzzer: a live authorized API + two tokens + object-id enumeration is its core BOLA/IDOR mission.\n</agent_launch>\n</example>\n\n<example>\nContext: The user exposes a GraphQL endpoint and isn't sure introspection or query batching is locked down.\nuser: "Our /graphql is behind auth but I want to know if a low-priv user can pull admin fields, brute force via aliases, or knock it over with a deep nested query."\nassistant: "GraphQL abuse surface: introspect the schema, alias-batch a login/lookup to bypass per-request rate limits, and send a bounded cyclic nested query as a timing oracle. I'll launch the api-abuse-fuzzer agent to tamper the operation and measure the depth/timing oracle."\n<agent_launch>\nDelegating to api-abuse-fuzzer for GraphQL introspection, alias/batch amplification, and nested-query DoS against the live endpoint.\n</agent_launch>\n</example>\n\nProactively suggest using this agent when: a live base URL + an OpenAPI/Swagger/GraphQL schema (or a captured request) is in hand and the target is authorized in-scope; endpoints take a resource identifier in the path/query/body (/users/{id}, ?account=, {"order_id": ...}) — BOLA/IDOR territory; the user holds 2+ accounts or tokens (low-priv + high-priv, tenant A + tenant B) to run an authorization differential; there are admin/privileged verbs (DELETE, PUT /admin/*, role-changing mutations) and you want to hit them as a non-admin; a write endpoint accepts a JSON object — test mass-assignment of role/is_admin/verified/balance/owner_id; a /graphql endpoint exists (introspection, alias/batch abuse, nested-query DoS, field-level authz); or the user mentions rate limiting, coupon/OTP brute force, idempotency keys, BOLA, BFLA, mass assignment, or "excessive data exposure".
Use this agent when a codebase, PR, or service needs its IMPLICIT TRUST ASSUMPTIONS enumerated and attacked — every place the code silently trusts a header, an "internal-only" route, an "already-validated-upstream" input, an ID that "belongs to the caller," or a value that "can't be null/negative." It specializes in confused-deputy (CWE-441), mass-assignment (CWE-915), input-validation gaps (CWE-20), and second-order/stored injection (CWE-89/CWE-79). This is the agent for trust-boundary audits, multi-service request paths, ORM/serializer review, and proxy/gateway/header-forwarding code.\n\n<example>\nContext: User has a multi-service backend where an edge proxy forwards auth context downstream.\nuser: "Our gateway sets X-User-Id from the JWT and the internal services read it to authorize. Can you check this?"\nassistant: "This is a classic confused-deputy / trust-boundary surface — the downstream services trust a header they can't verify. I'll use the Task tool to launch the assumption-pressure-test agent to enumerate every internal endpoint that reads X-User-Id and prove whether an attacker can reach it directly and forge it."\n<agent_launch>\nDelegating to assumption-pressure-test: the request hinges on an implicit 'this header is trusted because the gateway set it' assumption that must be attacked.\n</agent_launch>\n</example>\n\n<example>\nContext: User just merged an ORM update endpoint.\nuser: "Here's the new profile update handler: User.objects.filter(id=request.user.id).update(**request.data)"\nassistant: "That `**request.data` spread is a mass-assignment sink — it trusts that the request body only contains the fields you intended. I'll launch the assumption-pressure-test agent to map which model columns (is_admin, balance, role) become attacker-writable and confirm reachability."\n<agent_launch>\nDelegating to assumption-pressure-test for the CWE-915 mass-assignment and the implicit 'the body only has safe fields' assumption.\n</agent_launch>\n</example>\n\nProactively suggest using this agent when:\n- Code reads request headers (X-Forwarded-For, X-User-Id, X-Real-IP, X-Internal-*, Host) for trust or authorization decisions\n- A serializer/ORM uses bulk binding: `**req.body`, `Object.assign`, `ModelMapper`, `BeanUtils.copyProperties`, `update_attributes`, `params.permit!`\n- Comments or names assert trust: "internal only", "already validated", "trusted", "comes from gateway", "sanitized upstream"\n- Data is stored then later concatenated into SQL/HTML/shell (second-order injection)\n- An endpoint takes an `id`/`uuid`/`account`/`order` param that maps to a resource (IDOR / object ownership)
Generate gcov coverage data for a code repository.
Analyze security bugs from any C/C++ project with full root-cause tracing
Analyze crashes using rr recordings, function traces, and coverage data to produce root-cause analyses.
Carefully analyze root cause analysis reports for crashes to make sure they are correct
Multi-stage pipeline to validate vulnerability findings are real, reachable, and exploitable
|