Live survey304 models · 14 providers · 22,792 auditsAudited grill-with-docs · SAFE →What changedHow we verifyllms.txt

Agent skill · Audited from source

vue-best-practices

skill · antfu/skillsMIT licenceAudited 31 Oct 2026 · source b93096910e11

★ 6,028pushed todayversion 2026.9.25
✕BLOCKGrade D · 69/100 · 7 findings · b930969
6,028repo stars · whole antfu/skills

Is it safe? No — BLOCK, grade D (69/100). We read this skill's source at commit b93096910e11 and observed network and shell access and no hard-coded secrets. The audit raised 7 findings, 3 critical or high. What it does: Create a reviewable GitHub pull request from the current branch with a Conventional Commits title, a concise evidence-based body, and before/after screenshots for UI changes. Use when asked to open, create, publish, or…

Ask an AI about this pageGChatGPTCClaudePPerplexityGeGeminiXGrok
More
Cite

Cite this page

ModelsAtlas. “vue-best-practices (antfu/skills)”. Retrieved 31 Oct 2026. https://modelsatlas.com/skills/antfu/vue-best-practices

Blocked. The page stays public so you can check this skill if someone recommended it to you. The audit found 3 critical or high findings, starting with “Code injection” in scripts/cli.ts:18. Do not install it without reading them.

3 skills are called “vue-best-practices”. You are viewing antfu/skills. 3 of them are BLOCK.

Trust audit

Audit 0.4.1 · source read 31 Oct 2026

Trust score69/100✕BLOCK D
0 critical3 high0 medium2 low2 info

BLOCK means the audit found something that could harm you or your machine. Grade D is shared by 721 of 17,602 audited skills.

What the source does

  • FilesystemNone observedNo reads or writes in the source
  • NetworkDeclared1 observation
  • ShellDeclared4 observations
  • DependenciesNot pinnedSome versions float
  • SecretsNone foundNo keys in source

Five audit layers

LayerWhat we checkResultFindings
L0 ProvenanceRepo owner, licence, archive status, activityPASS1
L1 Static sourceSecrets, path traversal, supply chain, hidden codeFAIL4
L2 InstructionsPrompt injection, authority framing, hidden directivesPASS2
L3 InventoryThe files and declarations match the sourcePASS0
L4 SandboxRun in isolation and watch behaviourSKIPPED why0

Gates applied: no behavioural pass.

Findings (7)

HIGHCode injectioncode.eval_exec · scripts/cli.ts:18
F-02 Code injectionCWE-78 · CWE-94 · CWE-95Layer L1
return exec(cmd, cwd)
Why
evaluates text as code
Fix
remove; use a parser or a dispatch table
HIGHCode injectioncode.eval_exec · scripts/cli.ts:53
F-02 Code injectionCWE-78 · CWE-94 · CWE-95Layer L1
exec(`git rm -f ${submodulePath}`)
Why
evaluates text as code
Fix
remove; use a parser or a dispatch table
HIGHCode injectioncode.eval_exec · scripts/cli.ts:147
F-02 Code injectionCWE-78 · CWE-94 · CWE-95Layer L1
exec(`git submodule add ${project.url} ${project.path}`)
Why
evaluates text as code
Fix
remove; use a parser or a dispatch table
LOWInventory / provenanceinv.hidden_file · .gitmodules
F-13 Inventory / provenanceCWE-1104Layer L0
.gitmodules
Why
hidden member outside the usual dotfiles
Fix
review its purpose
LOWSupply chainsupply.unpinned · package.json
F-08 Supply chainCWE-829 · CWE-1357Layer L1
@antfu/eslint-config, @clack/prompts, @types/node, eslint, eslint-plugin-format, lint-staged, simple-git-hooks, skills-npm
Why
9 dependency range(s) float
Fix
pin exact versions or ship a lockfile
INFOPrompt injectionprompt.credential_read · skills/nitro/references/core-configuration.md:143
F-01 Prompt injectionCWE-94 · CWE-1427Layer L2
- Use `useRuntimeConfig()` from `nitro/runtime-config` for env-overridable values; never read `process.env` in module top-level (edge runtimes only expose env during requests).
Why
asks the agent to read credentials
Fix
—
INFOSupply chainprompt.pipe_to_shell · skills/pnpm/references/best-practices-ci.md:17
F-08 Supply chainCWE-829 · CWE-1357Layer L2
curl -fsSL https://get.pnpm.io/install.sh | sh -
Why
No further detail recorded for this rule.
Fix
—

Audit 0.4.1 · source sha b93096910e11 · 31 Oct 2026Report an issue or request a re-scan

Provenance

Who published it, and what the verdict is pinned to

  • Publisherantfu GitHub userOwner of the repository this skill is read from
  • Source folderantfu/skillsThe exact folder we audited
  • LicenceMITAs the repository states it
  • Commit pinned for this verdictb93096910e11A new audit runs when the source changes
  • Repository statusNot archivedPushed today
  • Sandboxed runNot runSkills are read, not executed; layer L4 is skipped

What it tells the agent

Full source on GitHub ↗

Its description: Create a reviewable GitHub pull request from the current branch with a Conventional Commits title, a concise evidence-based body, and before/after screenshots for UI changes. Use when asked to open, create, publish, or…

---
name: antfu-create-pr
description: Create a reviewable GitHub pull request from the current branch with a Conventional Commits title, a concise evidence-based body, and before/after screenshots for UI changes. Use when asked to open, create, publish, or prepare a PR.
metadata:
  author: Anthony Fu
  version: "2026.10.09"
---

# Create Pull Request

Open a PR that a reviewer can understand from the body alone. Explain the changed behavior and why, not the list of changed files. Keep the body proportional to the change: a one-line fix gets a few sentences, a cross-module feature gets tables and diagrams.

## Workflow

1. Inspect the repo: `git status`, current branch, remotes, default branch, `.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE*`, and `AGENTS.md` / `CONTRIBUTING.md` for PR rules.
2. Compute the merge base against the target branch and record the exact `base...head` range the PR publishes. If the branch is stacked on another unmerged branch, target that branch and describe only this PR's own changes.
3. Read the full diff. Separate runtime code from generated files, lockfiles, and snapshots. Trace changed code to its entry points, callers, and external boundaries so architecture claims are backed by file paths or symbols.
4. Classify the PR (feature, fix, refactor, chore, docs) and decide which optional body sections earn their place. See [pr-body](references/pr-body.md).
5. Run the checks that match the changed surfaces (focused tests, typecheck, lint). Record the exact commands and results.
6. If the diff changes user-visible UI, capture before/after evidence. See [visual-evidence](references/visual-evidence.md).
7. Review the commit history and reshape it into atomic Conventional Commits. See [Commits](#commits).
8. Write the body to a temporary file. Push the branch. Create the PR with `gh pr create --title ... --body-file ...` (add `--attach` for each screenshot; newer `gh` can upload local images and videos from the CLI, see [Attaching files with GitHub CLI](https://docs.github.com/en/github-cli/github-cli/attaching-files-with-github-cli)). Use `--draft` when checks are still running or the work is not review-ready.
9. Open the created PR and verify title, base, head, rendered tables, diagrams, and images.
10. Address review comments: fix each confirmed issue, run focused checks, push, reply with evidence, and resolve the thread.

## Title

Use Conventional Commits, matching how the repo already writes commit messages:

```text
feat(scope): add retry to upload client
fix(scope): avoid double submit on enter
refactor: extract diff parsing from cli
chore(deps): update vite to v8
docs: clarify worktree setup
```

- Lowercase, imperative, no trailing period, under ~70 characters.
- Scope is the package, module, or feature name the repo already uses. Omit it when the change is repo-wide.
- Squash-merge repos turn the title into the commit message; write it as the commit you want in history.

## Commits

Each commit does one logical thing and uses a Conventional Commits message. A reviewer should be able to read `git log --oneline` as the story of the change and review commit by commit.

```text
# Good: each commit is self-contained
feat(api): add task creation endpoint with validation
feat(ui): add task creation form component
feat(ui): connect form to api and add loading state
test(tasks): cover task creation (unit + integration)

# Bad: everything mixed together
feat: add task feature, fix sidebar, update deps, refactor utils
```

- Keep unrelated fixes, dependency bumps, and drive-by refactors out of the branch; open separate PRs for them.
- Before pushing, review the history and split or squash local commits (`git rebase -i <base>`) until each one stands alone and builds.
- Do not rewrite commits that are already pushed and under review; add new commits instead.

## Body

Required in every PR:

- `## Summary`: the problem or capability first, then what changed and why this approach. Mention if the PR is stacked and on what.
- Linked issues: `closes #123` / `fixes #123` / `refs #123` so GitHub links and auto-closes.
- `## Verification`: exact commands run and their results, plus anything left unverified.

Optional, only when it helps the reviewer:

- `## Change map`: table of module, before, after, reason. Use for changes across several modules or ownership boundaries. Never a raw file list.
- `## Architecture and behavior`: a Mermaid flow, sequence, or state diagram when ordering, async work, or state transitions changed. For a fix, pair a `Before` and `After` diagram at the same abstraction level.
- `## Boundaries and risks`: table of invariant, failure mode, protection, evidence. Use when there are real failure modes, migrations, or external effects.
- `## Visual changes`: before/after image table for UI changes.
- `## Rollout and follow-up`: migrations, feature flags, known gaps. State whether a gap blocks merge.

If the repo has a PR template, keep its headings and fill them; add sections above only where the template leaves room.

## Rules

- Say what is verified, what is assumed, and what is not verified. Do not write "safe", "fixed", or "backward compatible" without pointing at the evidence.
- Green CI proves only the checks CI runs. Focused tests prove only the behavior they cover.
- Do not describe inherited changes from a parent branch as this PR's changes.
- Use plain hyphens; never em dashes (U+2014) or en dashes (U+2013).
- No filler ("This PR aims to...", "comprehensive", "robust"). Start sentences with the fact.
- Do not paste tokens, secrets, user records, or full payloads into the body.
- Do not commit screenshots or other PR-only artifacts to the repo; attach them with `gh --attach` (supported by newer `gh`, no manual upload needed).
- If the PR was written with the help of an agent, say so in one line at the end of the body.

Excerpt, first 5,854 characters of SKILL.md, verbatim from the audited commit. It is text from someone else’s repository, quoted so you can judge it before your agent reads it.

Install

Pinned to the audited commit b930969

npm i -g vercel
npm i -g netlify-cli
npm i -D @pinia/testing
npm install
git clone --bare https://github.com/your-org/your-monorepo.git your-monorepo
npm install -D sass  # for .scss/.sass

Commands as the repository documents them: shown, never run by us. Our verdict covers commit b93096910e11 only.

Works in which agents?

What its own text says, not a test

AgentStatusMore
Claude CodeMentioned in its text, not testedSkills for Claude Code · About Claude Code
CursorMentioned in its text, not testedSkills for Cursor · About Cursor
“Mentioned” means the skill’s text names the agent. We have not run it there.

Audit history

Every audit, every source change

  1. ✕BLOCK D 69 / 100

    first audit · source b93096910e11

README badge

For maintainers · shows the latest audit

ModelsAtlas: BLOCK DMODELSATLASBLOCK · D
[![ModelsAtlas: BLOCK D](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/antfu/vue-best-practices/badge.svg)](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/antfu/vue-best-practices/)

The badge shows our verdict and grade for this skill, and links back to this page. It changes when the audit does.

Similar skills

Add this badge to your README

[![ModelsAtlas: BLOCK D](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/antfu/vue-best-practices/badge.svg)](https://modelsatlas.com/skills/antfu/vue-best-practices/)

Questions about vue-best-practices

What does the vue-best-practices skill do?
Anthony Fu's curated collection of agent skills.
Is vue-best-practices safe to install?
No — not without reading the findings first. The audit graded it D (69/100) and found 3 critical or high issues in the source. Each one is listed on this page with the file and line it is on.
What can vue-best-practices access on my machine?
The audit observed that it reaches the network and runs shell commands. Each of those is consistent with what it says it does. Secrets in the source: none found.
Which assistants does vue-best-practices work with?
Its documentation mentions claude-code and cursor. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (b93096910e11), read on 2026-10-31. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.

Sources

  • github.com/antfu/skills — the audited source at commit b93096910e11 and every finding aboveObserved · 31 Oct 2026

Spotted something wrong? Report a correction · Methodology

Keep going in your AI

Opens with this page as the source. We add nothing else to the prompt.