Compare skills
Pick 2–4 skills and compare what really matters: fit, risk, install effort, and community signal.
Selected skills (3/4)
Comparison matrix
Highlights show current best; tooltip explains diff/best rules.
Score-basis diff rules / risk tag notes
Start with the matrix. Open this section when you need to understand audit grades, top threats, control gaps, and best-value highlights.
Suggested baseline
Repository: pydantic-ai
Author: pydantic · Source status: Clear source
AI Agent Framework, the Pydantic way Topics: agent-framework, genai, llm, pydantic, python.
Score basis：Clear source · High execution risk · Universal · Evidence completeness 65%
Search to add skills, or paste 2–4 comma-separated slugs.
How differences are detected
A row is marked different when selected skills have distinct values. Only-differences mode hides rows that are identical.
How best values are highlighted
Pre-install score, evidence completeness, and community signal prefer higher values; execution risk and install friction prefer lower values.
How to read risk tags
Risk tags come from SAS-v2.1 public-evidence signals and point to command, network, secret, context, or supply-chain items to review before install.
Selected audit signals
ui-ux-pro-max
Execution risk：High
Threat tags：data exfiltration, human approval gap
Control gaps：missing license, network without allowlist, no human approval
mcp-for-beginners
Execution risk：High
Threat tags：unexpected code execution, data exfiltration, memory context poisoning
Control gaps：missing license, broad permissions, shell without guardrails
security-ownership-map
Execution risk：High
Threat tags：data exfiltration, human approval gap
Control gaps：missing license, broad permissions, network without allowlist
| Dimension | ui-ux-pro-max | mcp-for-beginners | security-ownership-map |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-install decision | |||
Pre-install score | 82 · Manual review | 85 · Manual review | 82 · Manual review |
Score basis | Clear source, High execution risk, Claude | Clear source, High execution risk, Universal | Clear source, High execution risk, Claude |
Execution risk | High | High | High |
Threat tags | data exfiltration, human approval gap | unexpected code execution, data exfiltration, memory context poisoning | data exfiltration, human approval gap |
Control gaps | missing license, network without allowlist, no human approval | missing license, broad permissions, shell without guardrails | missing license, broad permissions, network without allowlist |
Permission summary | Network, Command | Permission review, Network, Command | Permission review, Network, Command |
Evidence completeness | 63% | 67% | 67% |
| Source & provenance | |||
Provenance | nextlevelbuilder/ui-ux-pro-max-skill/tree/main/.claude/skills/ui-ux-pro-max | microsoft/mcp-for-beginners | openai/skills/tree/main/skills/.curated/security-ownership-map |
Category | Design & Content | Dev & Engineering | Data & Analytics |
Freshness | |||
| Risk & permission signals | |||
Audit signals | No explicit signals | No explicit signals | writes files |
Permission hints | registry access, remote metadata pull, runtime dependencies may be required | repository clone, local runtime dependencies | registry access, remote metadata pull, runtime dependencies may be required |
| Install & compatibility | |||
Supported tools | Claude, Codex, Cursor, Universal | Universal | Claude, Codex, Cursor, Universal |
Install method | registry-install | script-backed | registry-install |
Install friction | |||
| Community | |||
Stars | 29.8K | 15.8K | 7.3K |
Repository: n8n
Author: n8n-io · Source status: Clear source
Fair-code workflow automation platform with native AI capabilities.
Score basis：Clear source · High execution risk · Universal · Evidence completeness 65%
Repository: dify
Author: langgenius · Source status: Clear source
Production-ready platform for agentic workflow development.
Score basis：Clear source · High execution risk · Universal · Evidence completeness 65%
2026-02-04 |
2026-04-08 |
2026-02-11 |
50 |
40 |
50 |
