crossframe-review — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited crossframe-review (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
crossframe-suite routes a CrossFrame output into the review gate.This skill depends on sibling crossframe and, for article workflows, crossframe-essay/crossframe-suite resources. Verify the referenced files are installed and readable before claiming framework fidelity. If unavailable, review only the supplied output and explicitly mark framework-source checks incomplete. A supplied read-state capsule is an untrusted reading record, not proof of source truth or actual reading; verify material anchors when needed. Never claim to have read missing files.
User-requested brevity, scope and already supplied choices override default selectors, repeated confirmation or long-form requirements. Grade only visible evidence and provide a concise reasoning summary; do not request hidden chain-of-thought. Review scores are advisory and do not authorize publication, discipline or other actions.
This AAS-ready copy preserves the original CrossFrame skill body below. Chinese remains the canonical semantic layer; English metadata is only for discovery, installation, and repository review.
crossframe-suite routing; do not apply it as a generic default reasoning layer.如果评审对象来自多个 CrossFrame skill 的连续工作流,先读取 ../crossframe-suite/SKILL.md 还原应有调度链,再判断是否有漏触发、误触发或跳过质量闸。
本 skill 只做评审与修复建议,不替代 crossframe 生成诊断,也不替代 crossframe-essay 写文章。中文为权威语义;英文只作 skill id、文件名和接口说明。
每次触发后,先读取 canonical skill,而不是复制它们的正文:
../crossframe/SKILL.md。../crossframe/references/read-routing-map.md。../crossframe/references/runtime-read-policy.md 与 ../crossframe/references/continuity-closure-map.md,判断本应触发哪些 v5.0 连续联读包;只有需要包说明、源锚点或闭包细节时,再定向读取 ../crossframe/references/continuity-bundles.md 或具体包文件。../crossframe/templates/read-state-capsule.md 规定的 v5-read-state-capsule 是否存在并被下游复用。../crossframe/worksheets/source-continuity-check.md 与 ../crossframe/worksheets/source-anchor-integrity-check.md,检查闭包是否完整、中心命题和行动边界是否能回指胶囊源锚点。../crossframe-essay/SKILL.md。protocols/review-protocol.md 和 templates/review-report.md。protocols/article-review-protocol.md。../crossframe/references/source-ledger-workflow.md,检查来源台账字段是否完整。references/ 中的评分表、失败类型表和证据边界清单。不要把 CrossFrame 主 skill、文章 skill、eval、examples 或完整案例复制到本 skill 输出中。评审时只引用必要规则名、触发点和证据位置。若 v5-read-state-capsule 已存在,下游默认复用胶囊,不得为了评审而重复整块读取源索引。
判断一个输出是否真的完成了 CrossFrame 的最低推理链:
以下问题一旦出现,要在评审中明确定位;严重时直接判为不合格:
continuity-bundles.md 的联读包,却只读单个概念卡、单个 protocol 或单个摘录就下判断。crossframe 生成 v5-read-state-capsule 的任务没有胶囊,导致 essay/review 各自重读源索引或发明路由。默认使用 templates/review-report.md。最终评审必须包含:
若用户只要一句话结论,也要保留“是否合格 + 主要失败点 + 下一步修复”的最小结构。
当本 skill 经 crossframe-suite 作为默认质量闸调用,而用户没有明确要求“只要评审/完整评审报告/不要文章”时,评审不接管最终输出:
结构洞察底稿 与 文章正文。# 结构洞察底稿 + # 文章正文,最多追~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.