token-integration-analyzer
by trailofbitstoken-integration-analyzer is a security-review skill for token implementations and token integrations. It checks ERC20/ERC721 conformity, weird token patterns, owner privileges, scarcity, and non-standard token handling for Security Audit workflows. Use the token-integration-analyzer guide to reduce guesswork and assess compatibility risk.
This skill scores 83/100, which means it is a solid directory candidate: it gives agents a clear trigger, a substantive token-analysis workflow, and reusable report formats that should reduce guesswork versus a generic prompt. For directory users, it looks worth installing if they need structured ERC20/ERC721 integration review or weird-token risk analysis, though they should expect some workflow specifics to be inferred from the docs rather than automated by scripts.
- Strong operational scope: it explicitly targets token implementations, token integrations, on-chain scarcity analysis, and 20+ weird token patterns.
- Good triggerability and structure: the frontmatter description and multi-phase workflow make it easy for an agent to recognize when to use the skill.
- Useful deliverables: assessment categories and report templates provide concrete output structure for reviews.
- No install command or helper scripts are included, so execution still depends on the agent following the written procedure.
- The repository is documentation-heavy and appears to rely on manual analysis steps, which may limit speed and consistency in complex engagements.
Overview of token-integration-analyzer skill
What token-integration-analyzer does
token-integration-analyzer is a focused security-review skill for token code and token-facing protocols. It helps you check whether a token really behaves like ERC20 or ERC721, whether a protocol can safely handle weird or non-standard tokens, and whether owner powers, scarcity, or upgrade paths create hidden risk.
Who should use it
Use the token-integration-analyzer skill if you are reviewing a token launch, a DeFi integration, a vault, a bridge, a marketplace, or any system that accepts third-party tokens. It is especially useful for teams doing a token-integration-analyzer for Security Audit workflow where token behavior is part of the threat model, not just the application logic.
Why it is different
This skill is not a generic “analyze my Solidity repo” prompt. It is built around a token-integration checklist, weird-token pattern coverage, and context discovery. That means the token-integration-analyzer install is most valuable when you need decision-grade output on compatibility and edge cases, not just a superficial standards check.
How to Use token-integration-analyzer skill
Install and locate the right files
For token-integration-analyzer install, use the repo’s skill path from trailofbits/skills and then start with SKILL.md. Next, read resources/ASSESSMENT_CATEGORIES.md for the check categories and resources/REPORT_TEMPLATES.md for the expected output shape. Those two files are the fastest way to understand what evidence the skill will ask for.
Turn a rough goal into a usable prompt
Good token-integration-analyzer usage starts with a clear target:
- “Review this ERC20 for non-standard transfer behavior and owner controls.”
- “Assess whether our lending protocol safely handles fee-on-transfer and rebasing tokens.”
- “Check this NFT contract for ERC721 compliance, approval handling, and mint/burn edge cases.”
Include chain, contract type, deployment stage, and any known special behavior. If you know the token is upgradeable, rebasing, fee-on-transfer, pausable, or proxy-based, say so up front. Those facts change the analysis path more than broad security context does.
Suggested workflow for best results
- State whether you are analyzing a token implementation or a token integration.
- Provide the relevant source files, deployed address, or repo path.
- Ask for a checklist-style review plus a concise risk summary.
- Request attention to odd behaviors like taxes, rebases, blacklists, flash minting, or custom approvals.
The skill works best when you ask it to map behavior to concrete risk, not just to “find issues.”
What to read first
Begin with SKILL.md, then use the two resources files above to understand categories and reporting format. If your repo has Solidity, inspect the token contract, integration points, inheritance tree, and any proxy or admin modules before running a full review. For token-integration-analyzer guide workflows, that order reduces false confidence and makes the output easier to verify.
token-integration-analyzer skill FAQ
Is this only for token contracts?
No. The token-integration-analyzer skill covers both token implementations and protocols that integrate with tokens. That distinction matters: a perfectly valid token can still be dangerous for a vault, AMM, or bridge if the protocol assumes standard ERC behavior.
Do I need to be a Solidity expert?
No, but better inputs improve the result. Beginners can use it if they can name the contract, token type, and intended behavior. If you can’t explain the token’s special mechanics in one sentence, the skill may miss the key risk you care about.
Why not just use a normal prompt?
A normal prompt often misses weird-token edge cases, owner privilege implications, and the difference between standard compliance and safe integration. This skill is more useful when you want structured analysis and a repeatable review path instead of a one-off answer.
When should I not use it?
Skip it if your task is unrelated to token behavior, or if you only need a high-level product summary. It is also a weak fit when you cannot provide enough source context or deployment detail to distinguish standard ERC behavior from custom logic.
How to Improve token-integration-analyzer skill
Give the skill the exact token behavior
The biggest quality jump comes from naming nonstandard mechanics explicitly. Say whether the token has fees, rebases, blacklist rules, mint controls, pausability, hooks, wrapper logic, or proxy upgrades. For token-integration-analyzer, those details are more actionable than generic “audit this token” phrasing.
Ask for the output you need
If you need a security review, ask for a checklist plus ranked risks. If you need integration guidance, ask for expected failure modes and unsupported token classes. If you need launch readiness, ask for a yes/no recommendation with the blockers that matter most.
Watch for common failure modes
The most common mistake is underspecifying the environment: token standard, chain, proxy pattern, and integration surface. Another mistake is asking only for “bugs” when the real issue is compatibility. A token can pass basic ERC checks and still break accounting, withdrawals, or pricing logic in downstream systems.
Iterate with concrete follow-up data
If the first pass is incomplete, add the exact function, file, or address that seems risky, then rerun the token-integration-analyzer usage prompt with that evidence. Strong follow-up inputs look like: “Focus on transfer, fee exemptions, and the admin mint path in Token.sol; the protocol assumes transferFrom returns true and never reverts.”