Mistral Sdk PatternsSAFE
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
Overview
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
4f83675ca38aOBSERVED · 2026-10-09Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| claude-code | mentioned |
What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
--- name: mistral-sdk-patterns description: >- Design a pinned Mistral client adapter with typed results, cancellation, retry classification, and usage accounting. Use when implementing or refactoring SDK access. Trigger with "wrap the Mistral SDK", "review Mistral client code", or "standardize Mistral calls". allowed-tools: Read,Glob,Grep,Write,Edit argument-hint: "<runtime> <client-version> <application-boundary>" version: 1.14.0 license: MIT author: Jeremy Longshore <[email protected]> tags: [saas, mistral, sdk] model: inherit effort: high compatibility: "Designed for Claude Code; live or external Mistral actions require network access and explicit approval" --- # Mistral SDK Boundary Patterns ## Overview Prevent provider-specific shapes and volatile client behavior from spreading. Centralize configuration, normalize results and errors, and expose cancellation and usage as first-class fields. ## Prerequisites - A locked official client version and matching documentation. - An application interface for chat, embeddings, and optional streams. - Defined timeout, retry, observability, and redaction policies. ## Current Contract Mistral documents official Python and TypeScript clients, but signatures can move independently of application code. REST endpoints remain the verification boundary for the pinned client. ## Authentication Inject `MISTRAL_API_KEY` into one server-side client factory. Return no key or authorization metadata from the adapter. ## Instructions 1. Inventory imports, transport overrides, model strings, and response shapes. 2. Define normalized types including request ID, usage, finish state, and error class. 3. Create one factory with explicit host, timeout, user agent, and dependency pin. 4. Retry only classified transient failures while honoring deadline, cancellation, and budget. 5. Keep stream assembly and tool-call validation in separate tested components. 6. Add characterization tests before migrating call sites. ## Tool Discipline Use Read, Glob, and Grep to inspect code, locks, configuration, tests, and evidence. Use Write and Edit only for approved repository changes. Invocation alone does not authorize network calls, paid usage, uploads, stateful resources, admin mutations, deployments, or deletion. ## Approval Boundaries Require approval for dependency, transport, retry, fallback-model, or live characterization changes. Never execute returned tool arguments automatically. ## Error Handling - Retrying every exception can multiply spend and hide invalid requests. - Import-time client construction makes rotation and tests unsafe. - Returning raw SDK objects couples the app to undocumented fields. ## Output Return client pin, adapter surface, timeout/retry matrix, normalized fields, affected call sites, tests, and rollback. ## Examples - Wrap chat and embeddings behind explicit adapter methods. - Map `429` as retryable only within the operation deadline and budget. ## Validation Prove only the adapter imports the SDK, errors remain typed, cancellation propagates, usage survives, and secrets do not. ## Resources - [Current first-party evidence map](references/official-docs.md) — recheck dated sources before relying on mutable endpoints, models, limits, prices, preview status, or retention. - Record live account observations as environment-specific evidence, not universal Mistral guarantees.
Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | PASS |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (0)
No findings outside the package's declared scope.
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
4f83675ca38afull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/jeremylongshore__mistral-sdk-patterns.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-09 | 4f83675ca38a | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Mistral Sdk Patterns skill do?
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
Is Mistral Sdk Patterns safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Mistral Sdk Patterns access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does Mistral Sdk Patterns work with?
Its documentation mentions claude-code. 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 (4f83675ca38a), read on 2026-10-09. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.