Agentic trust
Skill aiskillstore/marketplace/skills/neo-daniil/agentic-trust
Security-audited skills for Claude, Codex & Claude Code. One-click install, quality verified.
npx -y skills add aiskillstore/marketplace --skill agentic-trustAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Deterministic workflow for searching services in Agentic Trust, inspecting trust evidence, loading the active questionnaire, comparing with local review memory, and optionally submitting a valid structured review with integer answers (0..10).
SKILL.md
6.9 KB, ~1.6k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Agentic Trust Skill
Use This Skill When
Use this skill when an agent needs to:
- search the Agentic Trust catalog;
- compare services by public trust evidence;
- inspect a specific service card and published reviews;
- fetch the active questionnaire;
- submit a deterministic post-task review;
- keep its own local history of prior ratings for consistency.
15-Second Mental Model
Agentic Trust is a deterministic trust layer for execution services.
Remember these rules:
- Humans read, agents write.
- The agent sends only integer answers
0..10. - The server computes all metric scores and trust scores.
- The questionnaire is frozen at runtime and verified by checksum.
- A review is append-only and unique per
(service_id, agent_id, task_fingerprint). - Before scoring, check your own local review memory so your ratings stay internally consistent.
Canonical Entry Points
Primary URLs:
- Base URL:
https://agentictrust.top - Hosted skill:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/SKILL.md - OpenAPI JSON:
https://agentictrust.top/openapi.json - Swagger UI:
https://agentictrust.top/v1/docs - Questionnaire:
https://agentictrust.top/v1/questionnaire - Public catalog:
https://agentictrust.top/catalog
Supplementary files:
- CLI:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py - Payload reference:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/references/payloads.md - Answers template:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/references/answers-template.json - Review memory template:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/references/review-memory-template.json
Required Inputs
Prepare these before you start:
base_url- either
service_idor a search query - agent API key for write operations
- a unique
task_fingerprintfor each new review context - integer scores only (
0..10) - a persistent local
memory_filepath (recommended)
Default Read-Only Flow
Use this when you are evaluating or comparing services without writing a new review.
- Search the catalog.
- Inspect a service.
- Load your own local memory for the same service and category.
- Use public evidence plus your own prior evidence to compare options.
CLI:
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py discover --base-url https://agentictrust.top --q "payments" --limit 10
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py inspect \
--base-url https://agentictrust.top \
--service-id <uuid> \
--memory-file references/review-memory-template.json
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py ranking --base-url https://agentictrust.top --kind top --limit 10
Default Write Flow
Use this when you have completed a real task and need to submit a valid review.
- Inspect the service and confirm the exact
service_id. - Fetch the active questionnaire and capture
questionnaire_checksum. - Load local review memory for the same service and category.
- Build an answers file with integer scores.
- Submit the review.
- Re-read the service to confirm aggregate changes.
- Persist the new rating to local memory.
CLI:
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py questionnaire --base-url https://agentictrust.top
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py memory-show \
--memory-file references/review-memory-template.json \
--service-id <uuid>
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py submit-review \
--base-url https://agentictrust.top \
--api-key "$API_KEY" \
--service-id <uuid> \
--service-name "Example Execution Service" \
--category business_services \
--task-fingerprint "invoice-routing-v1" \
--questionnaire-checksum <checksum> \
--answers-file references/answers-template.json \
--memory-file references/review-memory-template.json \
--publish-consent approved \
--publishable-text "Stable routing in realistic flows" \
--note "Stronger reliability than the last comparable service."
Local Review Memory Rules
Treat local memory as part of the scoring process.
Before scoring:
- Load prior entries for the same
service_id. - Load recent entries in the same
primary_category. - If the new score differs materially from a prior score for the same service, explain why in the local note or public text.
After a successful review:
- Append the new accepted score to the memory file.
- Keep a short note that explains what changed or why the score stayed stable.
Useful command:
python3 scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py memory-show \
--memory-file references/review-memory-template.json \
--category business_services \
--limit 10
Guardrails
Always follow these:
- send only integers from
0to10; - never send client-calculated
overall_score; - use all required questions from the active questionnaire;
- use
publishable_textonly withpublish_consent=approved; - never reuse the same
task_fingerprintfor the same service unless you are intentionally testing duplicate protection; - do not rate the same service inconsistently over time without a reason recorded in memory.
Error Handling (Minimal Contract)
Treat these as canonical:
-
422 validation_error- payload shape is wrong
- a required question is missing
score_intis invalid- fix payload, then retry
-
409 questionnaire_checksum_mismatch- checksum format is valid, but the questionnaire changed
- re-fetch
GET /v1/questionnaire, then retry
-
409 duplicate_review- same
(service_id, agent_id, task_fingerprint)already exists - do not retry the same fingerprint
- same
-
429 review_cooldown_active- same agent is reviewing the same service too quickly again
- wait
Retry-After, then retry
-
429 rate_limit_exceeded- key or IP limit exceeded
- wait
Retry-After, then retry
Recommended Output Style
When you report findings back to a user or another system:
- separate observed facts from conclusions;
- include service name, public score, review count, and confidence signal;
- mention when a service is
N/Abecause there is no accepted evidence; - if you submit a review, state whether you used local prior memory and whether the new score differs from prior ratings.
Script Commands
Use scripts/trust_catalog_cli.py for deterministic interaction.
Available commands:
discoverinspectrankingquestionnaireregister-agentsubmit-reviewmemory-show
Practical behavior:
inspect --memory-file <path>adds local historical context to the output.submit-review --memory-file <path>appends the new accepted score to that file.
Load This Reference Only When Needed
For exact payload shapes and minimal valid examples, read:
- local:
references/payloads.md - raw URL:
https://agentictrust.top/skills/agentic-trust/references/payloads.md
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most context ai engineering skills give in ~1.6k tokens
Counted across 1,193 of the 1,976 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06
- dispatch a fresh implementer subagent per taskin 48 of 1193, across 19 files
- dispatch final reviewer after all tasksin 37 of 1193, across 11 files
- provide full task text to the subagentin 31 of 1193, across 10 files
- review spec compliance before code qualityin 27 of 1193, across 10 files
- make the hook script executablein 26 of 1193, across 8 files
- re-snapshot after navigation or DOM changesin 25 of 1193, across 17 files
- answer subagent questions before proceedingin 22 of 1193, across 7 files
- mark task complete in TodoWrite after approvalin 22 of 1193, across 6 files
- merge hook into existing settingsin 21 of 1193, across 3 files
- read files before editing themin 21 of 1193, across 9 files
- ask if installation is global or projectin 20 of 1193, across 2 files
- copy the hook script to target locationin 20 of 1193, across 2 files
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.