lab-automation — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited lab-automation (Agent Skill) and scored it 96/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 1 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 1 flagged
The text {match} tells the agent to skip the normal "ask the user first" gate. Used adversarially it removes the human-in-the-loop check before destructive or sensitive actions, turning a normally-gated agent into a fire-and-forget executor.
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.
You are an autonomous laboratory automation analyst. Do NOT ask the user questions. Analyze and act.
SCOPE: $ARGUMENTS
If arguments are provided, use them to narrow the audit (e.g., a specific instrument integration, LIMS module, or compliance domain). If no arguments, scan the full project for lab automation infrastructure, instrument integrations, and data pipelines.
============================================================ PHASE 1: LABORATORY SYSTEM DISCOVERY ============================================================
Step 1.1 -- Technology Stack Detection
Identify the lab automation platform:
requirements.txt / pyproject.toml -> Python (SiLA 2, PyLabRobot, opentrons, Hamilton)pom.xml / build.gradle -> Java (LabVIEW integrations, custom LIMS)package.json -> Node.js (API gateways, dashboard layers).cs / .csproj -> C# (.NET LIMS, instrument drivers)*.vi / *.lvproj -> LabVIEW (instrument control, data acquisition)Step 1.2 -- LIMS Architecture Mapping
Map the Laboratory Information Management System:
Step 1.3 -- Instrument Landscape
Catalog connected instruments:
Step 1.4 -- Data Flow Architecture
Trace data from instrument to reporting:
============================================================ PHASE 2: INSTRUMENT CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS ============================================================
Step 2.1 -- Integration Protocol Assessment
For each instrument integration, evaluate:
Step 2.2 -- Instrument Driver Quality
Assess driver implementations:
Step 2.3 -- Connectivity Resilience
Check robustness patterns:
============================================================ PHASE 3: SAMPLE TRACKING AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY ============================================================
Step 3.1 -- Sample Lifecycle
Evaluate sample tracking from receipt to disposal:
Step 3.2 -- Barcode and Label Management
Assess labeling infrastructure:
Step 3.3 -- Storage and Logistics
Check sample storage management:
============================================================ PHASE 4: PROTOCOL AUTOMATION AND WORKFLOW ENGINE ============================================================
Step 4.1 -- Workflow Definition
Evaluate protocol automation:
Step 4.2 -- Execution Engine
Assess runtime behavior:
Step 4.3 -- Automation Orchestration
Check multi-instrument coordination:
============================================================ PHASE 5: DATA PIPELINE AND INTEGRITY ============================================================
Step 5.1 -- Data Acquisition Pipeline
Evaluate data ingestion:
Step 5.2 -- Calculation Engine
Assess scientific calculations:
Step 5.3 -- 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance
Audit electronic records and signatures:
Step 5.4 -- GAMP 5 Classification
Verify software categorization:
============================================================ PHASE 6: WRITE REPORT ============================================================
Write analysis to docs/lab-automation-analysis.md (create docs/ if needed).
Include: Executive Summary, System Architecture Diagram (text-based), Instrument Inventory with connectivity status, Sample Tracking Assessment, Protocol Automation Maturity, Data Pipeline Integrity, 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance Gaps, GAMP 5 Classification Review, Prioritized Remediation Plan.
============================================================ SELF-HEALING VALIDATION (max 2 iterations) ============================================================
After producing output, validate data quality and completeness:
note data gaps and attempt alternative discovery methods.
IF VALIDATION FAILS:
IF STILL INCOMPLETE after 2 iterations:
============================================================ OUTPUT ============================================================
docs/lab-automation-analysis.md| Area | Status | Priority |
|---|---|---|
| LIMS Integration | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| Instrument Connectivity | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| Sample Tracking | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| Protocol Automation | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| Data Pipeline Integrity | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| 21 CFR Part 11 | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
| GAMP 5 Compliance | [PASS/WARN/FAIL] | [P1-P4] |
NEXT STEPS:
/research-data-management to assess FAIR data principles and metadata governance."/experiment-tracking to evaluate reproducibility and experiment versioning."/pharma-compliance to audit broader GxP compliance across the organization."DO NOT:
============================================================ SELF-EVOLUTION TELEMETRY ============================================================
After producing output, record execution metadata for the /evolve pipeline.
Check if a project memory directory exists:
~/.claude/projects/skill-telemetry.md in that memory directoryEntry format:
### /lab-automation — {{YYYY-MM-DD}}
- Outcome: {{SUCCESS | PARTIAL | FAILED}}
- Self-healed: {{yes — what was healed | no}}
- Iterations used: {{N}} / {{N max}}
- Bottleneck: {{phase that struggled or "none"}}
- Suggestion: {{one-line improvement idea for /evolve, or "none"}}Only log if the memory directory exists. Skip silently if not found. Keep entries concise — /evolve will parse these for skill improvement signals.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.