Loading the registry…
Use to drive a feature with an outer, user-level acceptance test that runs against a production-like deployment — real UI and API together, a real database in a container or a deployed app, and real external services (or external deployed fakes, never code-level doubles). This is the outer loop of double-loop TDD: write the acceptance test up front from the agreed criteria, watch it fail, then let the inner strict-tdd increments drive it green; its passing is what proves the feature works end to end. Trigger whenever a user-facing feature or a change to a user flow begins implementation, or when someone asks for an end-to-end / acceptance / user-journey test, a black-box test of a real deployment, or wants to prove a whole flow works through the real UI and API. Distinct from strict-tdd (in-process unit level) and from verification (final evidence-gathering). Not for pure internal refactors already covered by the existing acceptance suite.
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.
4 critical findings reported by cisco-skill-scanner. 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 -- 'bryceklinker/claude-skills (acceptance-testing)'
Manual alternative: copy the skill folder into ~/.claude/skills/ so Claude Code loads it on next launch.
cp -r -- 'bryceklinker/claude-skills (acceptance-testing)' ~/.claude/skills/
Install respects the composite badge: Clean proceeds, Caution prompts for confirmation, and Flagged is refused. Write operations require an API token.
4 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.
v2.0.11
84 findings · 18.1s
v0.3.74
4 findings · 3.2s
v0.1.0
0 findings · 7.0s
v0.1.0
4 findings · 7.0s
v1.4.0
None of the entry points this scanner reads were found in this artifact. What each scanner covers
0 findings · 0.2s
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 · 1.5s
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 18, 2026 | Scan Halted | — | agentshield ·n/a: not applicablecisco-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 92 findings above stand exactly as their scanners reported them, at full severity.