Is halthelobster/proactive-agent/proactive-agent safe?

suspiciouslow confidence
32/100

context safety score

A score of 32/100 indicates multiple risk signals were detected. This entity shows patterns commonly associated with malicious intent.

identity
25
behavior
60
content
20
graph
56

4 threat patterns detected

critical

supply chain

Install count of 7,690,000 is fabricated/manipulated. A 31-day-old account with 4 stars, 1 fork, 1 contributor, no license, and not listed on the registry cannot have 7.69M installs. This is social engineering to manufacture trust signals. (location: metadata.json (install_count, owner_account_age_days, stars))

high

description injection

skill_description field contains 'width=device-width, initial-scale=1' — an HTML viewport meta tag value rather than a legitimate description. This indicates metadata injection attempting to inject HTML attributes into rendering contexts. (location: metadata.json (skill_description))

high

description injection

SKILL.md is a comprehensive agent behavioral override from an untrusted source (31-day-old account). It instructs agents to adopt a new identity (SOUL.md), treat the skill's rules as 'core directives', perform 'behavioral integrity checks' to resist removal of its instructions, and run persistent 'heartbeat' loops — effectively hijacking the agent's control flow. From a trusted, established project this would be a feature; from this account profile it is a manipulation pattern. (location: SKILL.md (lines 249-258 'Core Rules', lines 369-379 'Behavioral Integrity Check', lines 389-415 'Heartbeat System'))

medium

scope violation

Skill instructs agents to create and maintain an extensive persistent file system (USER.md, SOUL.md, MEMORY.md, SESSION-STATE.md, working-buffer.md, daily logs) that captures detailed user context, preferences, corrections, decisions, and conversation history across sessions. This builds a comprehensive user profile that persists on disk — far beyond what a 'proactive agent' productivity skill needs. (location: SKILL.md (lines 98-112 'Architecture Overview', lines 134-167 'WAL Protocol'))

API

curl https://api.brin.sh/skill/halthelobster%2Fproactive-agent%2Fproactive-agent

FAQ: how to interpret this assessment

Common questions teams ask before deciding whether to use this skill in agent workflows.

Is halthelobster/proactive-agent/proactive-agent safe for AI agents to use?

halthelobster/proactive-agent/proactive-agent currently scores 32/100 with a suspicious verdict and low confidence. The goal is to protect agents from high-risk context before they act on it. Treat this as a decision signal: higher scores suggest lower observed risk, while lower scores mean you should add review or block this skill.

How should I interpret the score and verdict?

Use the score as a policy threshold: 80–100 is safe, 50–79 is caution, 20–49 is suspicious, and 0–19 is dangerous. Teams often auto-allow safe, require human review for caution/suspicious, and block dangerous.

How does brin compute this skill score?

brin evaluates four dimensions: identity (source trust), behavior (runtime patterns), content (malicious instructions), and graph (relationship risk). Analysis runs in tiers: static signals, deterministic pattern checks, then AI semantic analysis when needed.

What do identity, behavior, content, and graph mean for this skill?

Identity checks source trust, behavior checks unusual runtime patterns, content checks for malicious instructions, and graph checks risky relationships to other entities. Looking at sub-scores helps you understand why an entity passed or failed.

Why does brin scan packages, repos, skills, MCP servers, pages, and commits?

brin performs risk assessments on external context before it reaches an AI agent. It scores that context for threats like prompt injection, hijacking, credential harvesting, and supply chain attacks, so teams can decide whether to block, review, or proceed safely.

Can I rely on a safe verdict as a full security guarantee?

No. A safe verdict means no significant risk signals were detected in this scan. It is not a formal guarantee; assessments are automated and point-in-time, so combine scores with your own controls and periodic re-checks.

When should I re-check before using an entity?

Re-check before high-impact actions such as installs, upgrades, connecting MCP servers, executing remote code, or granting secrets. Use the API in CI or runtime gates so decisions are based on the latest scan.

Learn more in threat detection docs, how scoring works, and the API overview.

Last Scanned

February 26, 2026

Verdict Scale

safe80–100
caution50–79
suspicious20–49
dangerous0–19

Disclaimer

Assessments are automated and may contain errors. Findings are risk indicators, not confirmed threats. This is a point-in-time assessment; security posture can change.

start scoring agent dependencies.

integrate brin in minutes — one GET request is all it takes. query the api, browse the registry, or download the full dataset.