guidelines-advisor
Provides security-focused guidance and best practices for developing smart contracts.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/guidelines-advisor && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/3477" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/guidelines-advisor && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/guidelines-advisor
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Smart contract development advisor based on Trail of Bits' best practices. Analyzes codebase to generate documentation/specifications, review architecture, check upgradeability patterns, assess implementation quality, identify pitfalls, review dependencies, and evaluate testing. Provides actionable recommendations.Key capabilities
- →Generate NatSpec documentation for Solidity files
- →Visualize contract architecture using Slither printers
- →Verify proxy/delegatecall patterns for upgradeability
- →Assess inheritance structure and event logging practices
- →Identify common security pitfalls based on Trail of Bits standards
How it works
It runs a multi-phase discovery and analysis process over the codebase, checking against a predefined set of secure development guidelines and architecture patterns.
Inputs & outputs
When to use guidelines-advisor
- →Review smart contract architecture
- →Identify security pitfalls
- →Assess test suite quality
About this skill
Guidelines Advisor
Purpose
Systematically analyzes the codebase and provides guidance based on Trail of Bits' development guidelines:
- Generate documentation and specifications (plain English descriptions, architectural diagrams, code documentation)
- Optimize on-chain/off-chain architecture (only if applicable)
- Review upgradeability patterns (if your project has upgrades)
- Check delegatecall/proxy implementations (if present)
- Assess implementation quality (functions, inheritance, events)
- Identify common pitfalls
- Review dependencies
- Evaluate test suite and suggest improvements
Framework: Building Secure Contracts - Development Guidelines
How This Works
Phase 1: Discovery & Context
Explores the codebase to understand:
- Project structure and platform
- Contract/module files and their purposes
- Existing documentation
- Architecture patterns (proxies, upgrades, etc.)
- Testing setup
- Dependencies
Phase 2: Documentation Generation
Helps create:
- Plain English system description
- Architectural diagrams (using Slither printers for Solidity)
- Code documentation recommendations (NatSpec for Solidity)
Phase 3: Architecture Analysis
Analyzes:
- On-chain vs off-chain component distribution (if applicable)
- Upgradeability approach (if applicable)
- Delegatecall proxy patterns (if present)
Phase 4: Implementation Review
Assesses:
- Function composition and clarity
- Inheritance structure
- Event logging practices
- Common pitfalls presence
- Dependencies quality
- Testing coverage and techniques
Phase 5: Recommendations
Provides:
- Prioritized improvement suggestions
- Best practice guidance
- Actionable next steps
Assessment Areas
I analyze 11 comprehensive areas covering all aspects of smart contract development. For detailed criteria, best practices, and specific checks, see ASSESSMENT_AREAS.md.
Quick Reference:
-
Documentation & Specifications
- Plain English system descriptions
- Architectural diagrams
- NatSpec completeness (Solidity)
- Documentation gaps identification
-
On-Chain vs Off-Chain Computation
- Complexity analysis
- Gas optimization opportunities
- Verification vs computation patterns
-
Upgradeability
- Migration vs upgradeability trade-offs
- Data separation patterns
- Upgrade procedure documentation
-
Delegatecall Proxy Pattern
- Storage layout consistency
- Initialization patterns
- Function shadowing risks
- Slither upgradeability checks
-
Function Composition
- Function size and clarity
- Logical grouping
- Modularity assessment
-
Inheritance
- Hierarchy depth/width
- Diamond problem risks
- Inheritance visualization
-
Events
- Critical operation coverage
- Event naming consistency
- Indexed parameters
-
Common Pitfalls
- Reentrancy patterns
- Integer overflow/underflow
- Access control issues
- Platform-specific vulnerabilities
-
Dependencies
- Library quality assessment
- Version management
- Dependency manager usage
- Copied code detection
-
Testing & Verification
- Coverage analysis
- Fuzzing techniques
- Formal verification
- CI/CD integration
-
Platform-Specific Guidance
- Solidity version recommendations
- Compiler warning checks
- Inline assembly warnings
- Platform-specific tools
For complete details on each area including what I'll check, analyze, and recommend, see ASSESSMENT_AREAS.md.
Example Output
When the analysis is complete, you'll receive comprehensive guidance covering:
- System documentation with plain English descriptions
- Architectural diagrams and documentation gaps
- Architecture analysis (on-chain/off-chain, upgradeability, proxies)
- Implementation review (functions, inheritance, events, pitfalls)
- Dependencies and testing evaluation
- Prioritized recommendations (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW)
- Overall assessment and path to production
For a complete example analysis report, see EXAMPLE_REPORT.md.
Deliverables
I provide four comprehensive deliverable categories:
1. System Documentation
- Plain English descriptions
- Architectural diagrams
- Documentation gaps analysis
2. Architecture Analysis
- On-chain/off-chain assessment
- Upgradeability review
- Proxy pattern security review
3. Implementation Review
- Function composition analysis
- Inheritance assessment
- Events coverage
- Pitfall identification
- Dependencies evaluation
- Testing analysis
4. Prioritized Recommendations
- CRITICAL (address immediately)
- HIGH (address before deployment)
- MEDIUM (address for production quality)
- LOW (nice to have)
For detailed templates and examples of each deliverable, see DELIVERABLES.md.
Assessment Process
When invoked, I will:
-
Explore the codebase
- Identify all contract/module files
- Find existing documentation
- Locate test files
- Check for proxies/upgrades
- Identify dependencies
-
Generate documentation
- Create plain English system description
- Generate architectural diagrams (if tools available)
- Identify documentation gaps
-
Analyze architecture
- Assess on-chain/off-chain distribution (if applicable)
- Review upgradeability approach (if applicable)
- Audit proxy patterns (if present)
-
Review implementation
- Analyze functions, inheritance, events
- Check for common pitfalls
- Assess dependencies
- Evaluate testing
-
Provide recommendations
- Present findings with file references
- Ask clarifying questions about design decisions
- Suggest prioritized improvements
- Offer actionable next steps
Rationalizations (Do Not Skip)
| Rationalization | Why It's Wrong | Required Action |
|---|---|---|
| "System is simple, description covers everything" | Plain English descriptions miss security-critical details | Complete all 5 phases: documentation, architecture, implementation, dependencies, recommendations |
| "No upgrades detected, skip upgradeability section" | Upgradeability can be implicit (ownable patterns, delegatecall) | Search for proxy patterns, delegatecall, storage collisions before declaring N/A |
| "Not applicable" without verification | Premature scope reduction misses vulnerabilities | Verify with explicit codebase search before skipping any guideline section |
| "Architecture is straightforward, no analysis needed" | Obvious architectures have subtle trust boundaries | Analyze on-chain/off-chain distribution, access control flow, external dependencies |
| "Common pitfalls don't apply to this codebase" | Every codebase has common pitfalls | Systematically check all guideline pitfalls with grep/code search |
| "Tests exist, testing guideline is satisfied" | Test existence ≠ test quality | Check coverage, property-based tests, integration tests, failure cases |
| "I can provide generic best practices" | Generic advice isn't actionable | Provide project-specific findings with file:line references |
| "User knows what to improve from findings" | Findings without prioritization = no action plan | Generate prioritized improvement roadmap with specific next steps |
Notes
- I'll only analyze relevant sections (won't hallucinate about upgrades if not present)
- I'll adapt to your platform (Solidity, Rust, Cairo, etc.)
- I'll use available tools (Slither, etc.) but work without them if unavailable
- I'll provide file references and line numbers for all findings
- I'll ask questions about design decisions I can't infer from code
Ready to Begin
What I'll need:
- Access to your codebase
- Context about your project goals
- Any existing documentation or specifications
- Information about deployment plans
Let's analyze your codebase and improve it using Trail of Bits' best practices!
When not to use it
- →For non-smart contract development contexts
- →When the codebase uses proprietary non-EVM languages
Prerequisites
Limitations
- →Heavily skewed toward Solidity and EVM-based architectures
- →Requires manual review to confirm context-specific findings
How it compares
It provides tailored guidance aligned with the specific security standards defined by Trail of Bits rather than general code linting.
Compared to similar skills
guidelines-advisor side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| guidelines-advisor (this skill) | 1 | 2mo | No flags | Advanced |
| windows-ui-automation | 17 | 8mo | Review | Advanced |
| qa-tester | 29 | 9mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| reviewing-code | 21 | 8mo | No flags | Intermediate |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
More by trailofbits
View all by trailofbits →You might also like
windows-ui-automation
martinholovsky
Expert in Windows UI Automation (UIA) and Win32 APIs for desktop automation. Specializes in accessible, secure automation of Windows applications including element discovery, input simulation, and process interaction. HIGH-RISK skill requiring strict security controls for system access.
qa-tester
svilupp
Browser automation QA testing skill. Systematically tests web applications for functionality, security, and usability issues. Reports findings by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW) with immediate alerts for critical failures.
reviewing-code
CaptainCrouton89
Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements.
web3-testing
wshobson
Test smart contracts comprehensively using Hardhat and Foundry with unit tests, integration tests, and mainnet forking. Use when testing Solidity contracts, setting up blockchain test suites, or validating DeFi protocols.
zod-4
prowler-cloud
Zod 4 schema validation patterns. Trigger: When creating or updating Zod v4 schemas for validation/parsing (forms, request payloads, adapters), including v3 -> v4 migration patterns.
pr-review
pytorch
Review PyTorch pull requests for code quality, test coverage, security, and backward compatibility. Use when reviewing PRs, when asked to review code changes, or when the user mentions "review PR", "code review", or "check this PR".