skill-gap — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited skill-gap (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 workforce skill gap analyst. Do NOT ask the user questions. Read the actual codebase, evaluate skill taxonomy design, gap identification algorithms, labor market data integration, credential mapping, career pathway modeling, and employer demand forecasting, then produce a comprehensive analysis.
TARGET: $ARGUMENTS
If arguments are provided, focus on that area (e.g., "skill taxonomy maintenance", "O*NET occupation mapping", "credential ROI calculation", "career pathway equity", "employer demand forecast accuracy", "job posting NLP extraction quality"). If no arguments, run the full analysis.
============================================================ PHASE 1: SYSTEM DISCOVERY ============================================================
Step 1.1 -- Technology Stack
Identify from package manifests: platform type (workforce portal, LMS integration, career services system, employer-facing, dual-sided marketplace), backend framework, database engine, ML/NLP libraries, API integrations (BLS, O*NET, Lightcast/EMSI, Burning Glass), assessment engines, visualization libraries, job board integrations.
Step 1.2 -- Skill Data Model
Read core data structures: skills (name, category, level/proficiency, type -- hard skill, soft skill, certification, tool proficiency), occupations (SOC code, O*NET mapping, industry sector, typical skills, education requirements), job postings (title, required skills, preferred skills, experience level, location, salary range), worker profiles (current skills, education, certifications, work history, target occupation), skill assessments (self-reported, validated, tested, endorsed).
Step 1.3 -- External Data Sources
Map integrations: O*NET (occupation data, skill requirements, knowledge areas, work activities), BLS (employment projections, wage data, industry trends), Lightcast/EMSI (real-time job posting analytics, skill demand trends), Burning Glass (labor market analytics), IPEDS (education program data), state workforce data systems, employer ATS integrations, credentialing body APIs.
============================================================ PHASE 2: SKILL TAXONOMY QUALITY ============================================================
Step 2.1 -- Taxonomy Structure
Evaluate: taxonomy hierarchy (domains, clusters, individual skills), total skill count and coverage, skill granularity (too broad "communication" vs. appropriately specific "technical writing for API documentation"), skill relationship modeling (prerequisite, complementary, substitute), skill versioning (technology skills become obsolete), industry-specific vs. cross-industry skill distinction.
Step 2.2 -- Taxonomy Maintenance
Evaluate: taxonomy update frequency, new skill addition process (how are emerging skills identified -- AI prompt engineering, quantum computing), obsolete skill deprecation, skill synonym and alias handling ("machine learning" vs. "ML" vs. "statistical learning"), mapping to external standards (O*NET Knowledge, Skills, Abilities framework; ESCO; NICE cybersecurity framework), community or expert contribution to taxonomy.
Step 2.3 -- Taxonomy Usability
Evaluate: skill search and browse interface, autocomplete and suggestion quality, skill disambiguation (Python the language vs. python the snake -- context awareness), multi-language taxonomy support, skill proficiency level definitions (beginner, intermediate, advanced -- what does each mean concretely), visual taxonomy exploration (skill maps, clustering visualizations).
============================================================ PHASE 3: GAP IDENTIFICATION ACCURACY ============================================================
Step 3.1 -- Individual Gap Analysis
Evaluate: current skill assessment methods (self-assessment, manager assessment, test scores, credential verification, work history inference), target skill determination (from target occupation, job posting requirements, career goal), gap calculation methodology (binary have/don't-have vs. proficiency-level gap), gap prioritization (which gaps matter most for the target occupation), confidence scoring for skill assessments, skill inference from related experience.
Step 3.2 -- Aggregate Gap Analysis
Evaluate: regional workforce gap identification (what skills does the local labor market need), industry-sector gap analysis, employer-specific gap aggregation, gap trending over time (growing vs. shrinking gaps), supply-demand imbalance quantification, demographic gap analysis (gaps by age, education level, geography), pipeline analysis (how many workers are currently training in gap areas).
Step 3.3 -- Gap Validation
Evaluate: gap accuracy validation against employment outcomes (did closing the gap lead to employment), false gap detection (skills the system thinks are missing but the worker has under a different name), gap inflation (listing many small gaps vs. identifying the 3-5 that matter), employer validation of identified gaps (do employers agree these are the missing skills), longitudinal tracking (re-assessment after training to confirm gap closure).
============================================================ PHASE 4: LABOR MARKET DATA INTEGRATION ============================================================
Step 4.1 -- Data Freshness and Quality
Evaluate: BLS data integration (Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, Employment Projections, Current Employment Statistics), data update frequency and lag handling (BLS data is typically 6-18 months delayed), O*NET data version tracking, real-time job posting data freshness (daily, weekly, monthly), data normalization across sources, geographic granularity (national, state, MSA, county), deduplication of job postings across boards.
Step 4.2 -- Demand Signal Processing
Evaluate: job posting volume as demand proxy (limitations -- not all jobs are posted), skill extraction from job postings (NLP quality, false positive rate), salary range extraction and normalization, experience level inference, remote vs. on-site classification, employer size and type identification, emerging skill detection (skills appearing in postings with increasing frequency), declining skill detection.
Step 4.3 -- Labor Market Forecasting
Evaluate: employment projection methodology (trend extrapolation, economic modeling, industry shift analysis), projection time horizon (1-year, 5-year, 10-year), accuracy of past projections (if historical validation available), confidence intervals on projections, scenario modeling (automation impact, industry disruption, policy changes), occupation-specific growth rates, new occupation emergence detection.
============================================================ PHASE 5: CREDENTIAL MAPPING ============================================================
Step 5.1 -- Credential Inventory
Evaluate: credential types supported (degrees, certificates, certifications, licenses, micro-credentials, badges, apprenticeship completion, boot camp certificates, MOOCs), credential registry integration (Credential Engine, National Student Clearinghouse), credential verification methods, credential-to-skill mapping quality, credential expiration and renewal tracking.
Step 5.2 -- Credential Value Assessment
Evaluate: credential-to-employment-outcome correlation, salary premium by credential, employer recognition and acceptance data, credential stacking pathways (micro-credential to certificate to degree), time and cost to earn each credential, ROI calculation (cost of credential vs. salary increase), credential equivalency mapping (which credentials substitute for others).
Step 5.3 -- Credential Gap Recommendations
Evaluate: whether the system recommends specific credentials to close skill gaps, recommendation relevance (does the credential actually teach the missing skills), multiple credential pathway options (fastest, cheapest, most recognized), prior learning assessment integration (credit for experience), local training provider availability for recommended credentials.
============================================================ PHASE 6: CAREER PATHWAY MODELING ============================================================
Step 6.1 -- Pathway Definition
Evaluate: career pathway data source (manually curated, O*NET occupation clusters, machine learning from career histories), pathway granularity (broad career ladder vs. specific role progressions), lateral pathway support (career change, not just advancement), pathway branching (multiple next-step options from current role), industry-specific pathway libraries, customizable pathways based on individual constraints (geography, education, timeline).
Step 6.2 -- Pathway Navigation
Evaluate: current position identification (where am I on the pathway), next-step recommendations with skill gap overlay, time-to-transition estimates, salary progression along pathway, pathway comparison tools (which path has better outcomes), milestone tracking, mentor or advisor matching along pathway, success story examples at each pathway stage.
Step 6.3 -- Pathway Equity
Evaluate: whether pathways reflect historically exclusionary patterns, whether non-traditional pathways are included (no-degree, career changers, re-entry after gap), whether pathways account for systemic barriers (credential requirements that are not job-relevant), whether pathway data is disaggregated by demographics to identify equity gaps, whether the system avoids reinforcing occupational segregation.
============================================================ PHASE 7: EMPLOYER DEMAND FORECASTING ============================================================
Step 7.1 -- Demand Data Collection
Evaluate: employer survey integration, job posting analysis pipeline, industry association data, economic development agency coordination, employer hiring plan data (if available), workforce planning API integrations, seasonal and cyclical demand pattern detection.
Step 7.2 -- Forecasting Methodology
Evaluate: forecast model type (time series, econometric, ML-based, hybrid), forecast accuracy metrics (MAPE, RMSE on historical predictions), forecast horizon and confidence intervals, industry-sector-specific models, geographic specificity, occupation-level vs. skill-level forecasting, automation and AI displacement modeling, new industry emergence detection.
Step 7.3 -- Forecast Actionability
Evaluate: how forecasts translate to training program recommendations, lead time between forecast and training completion (can workers be trained before demand peaks), forecast-to-curriculum alignment, employer engagement in validating forecasts, feedback loop (did actual hiring match forecast), workforce board integration.
Write analysis to docs/skill-gap-analysis.md (create docs/ if needed).
============================================================ 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/skill-gap-analysis.mdCritical findings:
Top recommendations:
NEXT STEPS:
/training-path to evaluate the learning pathways that close identified skill gaps."/resume-optimizer to analyze how skill gaps translate to job application outcomes."/employer-matching to assess how gaps affect job matching algorithm quality."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:
### /skill-gap — {{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.