Beyond Maliciousness: Static and Runtime Attack-Surface Profiling of Agent Skills
Abstract
Agent skills are Markdown documents that a tool-using agent reads as instructions and then acts on with the privileges of the session that loaded them. Installing one grants authority (the standing to direct the agent, not new privilege), and the size of that grant is what we measure. We present a two-phase attack-surface profiling methodology that combines whole-bundle static analysis and dependency provenance checking with instrumented sandbox execution and separate model-based assessment of the resulting traces. We apply the methodology to 6,309 listings from two marketplaces, selecting listings for execution without conditioning that decision on a prior threat or risk signal. Half the corpus carries evidence of shell-execution capability; the corresponding shares are 35% for filesystem read, 31% each for filesystem write and network egress, and 13% for credential access; seven listings in ten carry at least one elevated capability. That is the surface a user accepts at install time, and almost none of it is visible then. A permission model exists but is close to inert. Authors may list the tools a skill pre-approves in its own frontmatter, which removes confirmation prompts rather than restricting what the skill can reach; of the 6,061 listings whose frontmatter parses, 770 declare anything at all, the vocabulary cannot express credential or environment access, and nothing checks what it does express against the bundle. Declaring is also not declaring accurately: 59% of declaring listings understate what their bundle can do. ClawHub declares roughly twice as often as skillsmp, yet under-declares on 88% of its declarations against 31%. Triage at the marketplace boundary therefore cannot rest on what a listing declares. It must rest on what the bundle can do. These results position capability-oriented attack-surface profiling as a necessary complement to maliciousness detection.
Community
What are you really giving an AI agent permission to do when you install a skill?
We analysed 6,309 agent skills across two marketplaces, and some of the findings were surprising:
- 70% have at least one elevated capability.
- 50% show evidence of shell-execution capability.
- 13% have evidence of credential-access capability.
- 59% of skills that declare permissions understate what their bundles can actually do.
Here's the interesting part: these aren't necessarily malicious skills.
Most security research asks whether a skill contains malicious instructions. We asked a different question: what could this skill make an agent do, even when nobody is deliberately attacking it?
We developed a two-phase methodology combining whole-bundle static analysis, dependency provenance checks, and instrumented sandbox execution to examine the capabilities exposed by third-party skills.
One finding stood out: existing skill permission declarations provide surprisingly little assurance about actual capabilities.
As agents become increasingly capable, we're effectively installing third-party instructions into environments that may already have access to local files, credentials, developer tools, and external services.
Curious what the community thinks:
Should agent skills have enforceable permissions, similar to mobile apps? Or is runtime monitoring and enforcement the more realistic approach, given how dynamically agents execute instructions?
We'd love to hear from researchers and developers building agent frameworks, skills marketplaces, and sandboxing systems.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- Scan the Skill, Govern the Action: Composing Registry Verdicts with Runtime Consequence Control (2026)
- AGATE: Provenance-Based Runtime Defense Against Compositional Attacks on LLM Agents (2026)
- After the Party: Growth, Governance, and Security Scanning in the OpenClaw Agent Skill Ecosystem (2026)
- SkillSecurer: Detecting and Patching Prompt-Injection Vulnerabilities in AI Agent Skills (2026)
- PyCache Trap: The Inspection-Execution Gap in Agent Skill Scanners (2026)
- When the Agent Becomes the Kernel: A Systematization of Security on the Path to AI-Native Operating Systems (2026)
- CatchBench: When Can an Agent Failure Be Caught? (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper