secure-workflow-guide
by trailofbitssecure-workflow-guide guides a 5-step Solidity security workflow: Slither triage, feature-specific checks, visual inspection, security-property notes, and manual review. It is built for smart contract teams, auditors, and builders who want a repeatable secure-workflow-guide guide before deployment or release.
This skill scores 84/100, which means it is a solid directory listing for users working on smart contract security workflows. The repository gives clear trigger conditions, a concrete 5-step process, and example outputs that should help agents execute with less guesswork than a generic prompt, though users should expect some manual setup because it does not ship an install command or helper scripts.
- Clear operational trigger: the skill explicitly says to use it on every check-in, before deployment, or when a security review is needed.
- Strong workflow specificity: it lays out a 5-step secure development process with named tools like Slither, slither-check-upgradeability, slither-check-erc, and slither-prop.
- Good agent leverage: the included workflow steps and example report show what outputs to produce and how to interpret findings, reducing execution ambiguity.
- No install command or scripts are provided, so users may need to infer how to wire the skill into their environment.
- Support files are limited to two resources and there are no references, which reduces depth for edge-case implementation or verification.
Overview of secure-workflow-guide skill
The secure-workflow-guide skill helps you run Trail of Bits’ 5-step secure development workflow on a Solidity codebase, not just a one-off scan. It is best for smart contract teams, auditors, and builders who want a repeatable path from “what looks risky?” to “what should we verify next?” before deployment or release.
What this skill is for
The secure-workflow-guide skill centers on practical security triage: detect known issues, identify which specialized checks apply, inspect structure visually, document security properties, and review manual attack surfaces. That makes it especially useful for a secure-workflow-guide for Security Audit when you need coverage that goes beyond generic prompt advice.
Who should use it
Use it if your repo contains Solidity contracts, upgradeable patterns, ERC tokens, or integrations that need security review. It is a strong fit when you already have code and want a workflow that helps you prioritize findings, choose the right follow-up checks, and avoid running irrelevant tools.
What makes it different
Unlike a generic “review this contract” prompt, secure-workflow-guide is workflow-shaped. It gives you a security sequence: Slither-first triage, special-feature checks only where applicable, diagram-based inspection, property documentation, and manual review guidance. That structure reduces guesswork and helps prevent shallow audits that miss contract-specific risks.
How to Use secure-workflow-guide skill
Install and trigger it cleanly
Install with:
npx skills add trailofbits/skills --skill secure-workflow-guide
Then invoke the secure-workflow-guide skill with a concrete repo and a specific security goal. The best prompts name the contract type, the suspected architecture, and the decision you need. For example: “Run secure-workflow-guide on this UUPS staking system and focus on upgrade safety, access control, and ERC20 assumptions.”
Give the skill the right input
The secure-workflow-guide usage works best when you provide:
- the target repository or contract path
- whether the code is upgradeable, token-like, or integration-heavy
- what stage you are in: pre-merge, pre-deploy, or audit prep
- any known concern such as initialization, auth, or proxy storage layout
A weak prompt is “check this project.” A stronger one is “Use secure-workflow-guide on contracts/ and prioritize upgradeability, token handling, and high-severity Slither findings.”
Read these files first
Start with SKILL.md, then inspect resources/WORKFLOW_STEPS.md for the exact 5-step sequence and resources/EXAMPLE_REPORT.md to see the expected output shape. If you want to understand the repository quickly, those two resources are more useful than skimming the whole tree.
Use the workflow in order
Do not jump straight to special checks. The secure-workflow-guide guide is designed to start with known issues, then branch into only the checks your codebase actually needs. That order matters because it keeps you from wasting time on irrelevant analyses and helps surface the highest-value fixes first.
secure-workflow-guide skill FAQ
Is secure-workflow-guide only for Solidity?
It is built around Solidity smart contract review. If your project is not an EVM contract codebase, the secure-workflow-guide skill will usually be a poor fit and a generic code review prompt may be better.
How is this different from a normal prompt?
A normal prompt can ask for a review, but secure-workflow-guide encodes a security workflow: scan, classify, inspect, document, and verify. That makes it better when you want consistent audit prep rather than an ad hoc opinion.
Is it beginner-friendly?
Yes, if you can point it at a repo and name your goal. You do not need to know every Slither plugin in advance. The skill is more helpful when you can describe the contract shape, because the secure-workflow-guide skill can then choose the right branches of the workflow.
When should I not use it?
Do not use it as a substitute for formal audit judgment, and do not expect it to validate non-contract systems like frontend or backend app logic. It is strongest when the question is, “What security workflow should I run on this Solidity codebase?”
How to Improve secure-workflow-guide skill
Give it sharper context
The biggest quality gains come from telling the secure-workflow-guide skill what matters most: upgrade safety, token behavior, authorization, initialization, or external integrations. If the first output feels broad, narrow the task to one contract family or one risk class.
Provide concrete artifacts, not just intent
If you can, point to specific contracts, proxy names, token standards, or assumptions you want checked. “Review the staking system” is weaker than “Review Staking.sol and StakingProxy.sol for initialization, role gating, and storage compatibility.” The second prompt improves secure-workflow-guide usage because it reduces ambiguity in the checks it should prioritize.
Iterate from findings, not from the whole repo
After the first pass, feed back the most important results and ask for the next decision: fix prioritization, false-positive triage, or deeper manual review. That is usually better than asking for a completely fresh run. For secure-workflow-guide for Security Audit, the best outputs come from narrowing the scope after the first report, not expanding it blindly.