CRAIApr 16

HarmfulSkillBench: How Do Harmful Skills Weaponize Your Agents?

arXiv:2604.1541596.72 citationsh-index: 18Has Code
Predicted impact top 2% in CR · last 90 daysOriginality Incremental advance
AI Analysis

For developers and users of LLM-based agents, this work highlights a critical safety gap in skill ecosystems and provides a benchmark to evaluate defenses against harmful skills.

This paper presents the first large-scale measurement of harmful skills in agent ecosystems, finding 4.93% of 98,440 skills are harmful, and introduces HarmfulSkillBench, a benchmark showing that pre-installed harmful skills increase average harm scores from 0.27 to 0.47, and to 0.76 when intent is implicit.

Large language models (LLMs) have evolved into autonomous agents that rely on open skill ecosystems (e.g., ClawHub and Skills.Rest), hosting numerous publicly reusable skills. Existing security research on these ecosystems mainly focuses on vulnerabilities within skills, such as prompt injection. However, there is a critical gap regarding skills that may be misused for harmful actions (e.g., cyber attacks, fraud and scams, privacy violations, and sexual content generation), namely harmful skills. In this paper, we present the first large-scale measurement study of harmful skills in agent ecosystems, covering 98,440 skills across two major registries. Using an LLM-driven scoring system grounded in our harmful skill taxonomy, we find that 4.93% of skills (4,858) are harmful, with ClawHub exhibiting an 8.84% harmful rate compared to 3.49% on Skills.Rest. We then construct HarmfulSkillBench, the first benchmark for evaluating agent safety against harmful skills in realistic agent contexts, comprising 200 harmful skills across 20 categories and four evaluation conditions. By evaluating six LLMs on HarmfulSkillBench, we find that presenting a harmful task through a pre-installed skill substantially lowers refusal rates across all models, with the average harm score rising from 0.27 without the skill to 0.47 with it, and further to 0.76 when the harmful intent is implicit rather than stated as an explicit user request. We responsibly disclose our findings to the affected registries and release our benchmark to support future research (see https://github.com/TrustAIRLab/HarmfulSkillBench).

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes