Loading the registry…
Make the decisions that determine whether a Power Apps canvas app survives contact with real data - delegation strategy, data architecture, screen and navigation design, performance conventions - and produce a build plan Microsoft's canvas authoring tooling can then execute. Trigger whenever the user says "canvas app", "plan a canvas app", "build a canvas app", "design an app", "app screens", "gallery", "Power Fx", "delegation", "delegation warning", "which data source should I use", or describes a bespoke app UI for makers or field users. Also trigger mid-build on "why is my gallery only showing 500 records", "this filter isn't returning everything", "the app is slow", "should this be canvas or model-driven", or any question about app performance, data volumes, or screen structure. Plans and decides; hands execution to Microsoft's canvas tooling. If the task is designing, planning or de-risking a canvas app - trigger. When in doubt, trigger.
Claude Skills are markdown + scripts loaded into Claude Code; scanned with the same pipeline.
We found this by crawling public sources and nobody has attested to it. That is how most of the registry gets here, and it is not a mark against the artifact — it only means no authenticated act of publication is on record. An artifact can be the vendor's own and still appear here.
6 critical findings reported by cisco-skill-scanner, agent-audit-kit. The composite score alone does not reflect this — read the per-scanner reports below.
Claude Skills install to a single target, no runtime picker.
nerlo install -- 'howdangpowercademy/powercademy-skills (plan-canvas-app)'
Manual alternative: copy the skill folder into ~/.claude/skills/ so Claude Code loads it on next launch.
cp -r -- 'howdangpowercademy/powercademy-skills (plan-canvas-app)' ~/.claude/skills/
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
5 of 11 scanners examined this package. The rest do not apply to it — language, ecosystem and packaging decide which analyzers can say anything, and a scanner that cannot examine an artifact reports nothing rather than passing it.
v1.4.0
4 findings · 0.6s
v2.0.11
30 findings · 8.5s
v0.3.74
12 findings · 1.2s
v0.1.0
2 findings · 3.4s
v0.1.0
6 findings · 3.4s
vv0.3.2
No Go packages were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.1s
v0.1.0
This scanner found nothing in this artifact that it assesses. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 1.1s
No report in this scan: govulncheck, osv-scanner, trivy, trivy_image.
1 scan on record. Every scan's full results are retained immutably for 24 months.
| Completed | Composite | Change | Scanners | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 17, 2026 | Scan Halted | — | agentshield: completecisco-skill-scanner: completeagent-audit-kit: completenerlo-behavioral: completenerlo-install-instruction: completecapslock ·n/a: not applicablenerlo-multi-source ·n/a: not applicable | rejected |
Findings in files this artifact installs stand as reported; a model re-read the rest and said which ones it believes are false positives. This is a second opinion published beside the evidence, not a correction to it: the per-scanner reports above are unchanged, every dismissed finding is still listed there at its original severity, and the score and the Flagged badge are computed from those raw severities alone. Nothing below moved them.
This review has not run for this scan yet. It runs once per scan, in the background, and is kept; it appears here when it has. Until then all 54 findings above stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity.