ワンクリックで
semgrep-rule-creator
Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections.
メニュー
Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections.
Runs external LLM code reviews (OpenAI Codex or Google Gemini CLI) on uncommitted changes, branch diffs, or specific commits. Use when the user asks for a second opinion, external review, codex review, gemini review, or mentions /second-opinion.
Audits GitHub Actions workflows for security vulnerabilities in AI agent integrations including Claude Code Action, Gemini CLI, OpenAI Codex, and GitHub AI Inference. Detects attack vectors where attacker-controlled input reaches AI agents running in CI/CD pipelines, including env var intermediary patterns, direct expression injection, dangerous sandbox configurations, and wildcard user allowlists. Use when reviewing workflow files that invoke AI coding agents, auditing CI/CD pipeline security for prompt injection risks, or evaluating agentic action configurations.
Clarify requirements before implementing. Use when serious doubts arise.
Enables ultra-granular, line-by-line code analysis to build deep architectural context before vulnerability or bug finding.
Scans Algorand smart contracts for 11 common vulnerabilities including rekeying attacks, unchecked transaction fees, missing field validations, and access control issues. Use when auditing Algorand projects (TEAL/PyTeal).
Prepares codebases for security review using Trail of Bits' checklist. Helps set review goals, runs static analysis tools, increases test coverage, removes dead code, ensures accessibility, and generates documentation (flowcharts, user stories, inline comments).
| name | semgrep-rule-creator |
| description | Creates custom Semgrep rules for detecting security vulnerabilities, bug patterns, and code patterns. Use when writing Semgrep rules or building custom static analysis detections. |
| allowed-tools | Bash Read Write Edit Glob Grep WebFetch |
Create production-quality Semgrep rules with proper testing and validation.
Ideal scenarios:
Do NOT use this skill for:
static-analysis skill)When writing Semgrep rules, reject these common shortcuts:
semgrep --test --config <rule-id>.yaml <rule-id>.<ext> to verify. Untested rules have hidden false positives/negatives.Too broad - matches everything, useless for detection:
# BAD: Matches any function call
pattern: $FUNC(...)
# GOOD: Specific dangerous function
pattern: eval(...)
Missing safe cases in tests - leads to undetected false positives:
# BAD: Only tests vulnerable case
# ruleid: my-rule
dangerous(user_input)
# GOOD: Include safe cases to verify no false positives
# ruleid: my-rule
dangerous(user_input)
# ok: my-rule
dangerous(sanitize(user_input))
# ok: my-rule
dangerous("hardcoded_safe_value")
Overly specific patterns - misses variations:
# BAD: Only matches exact format
pattern: os.system("rm " + $VAR)
# GOOD: Matches all os.system calls with taint tracking
mode: taint
pattern-sources:
- pattern: input(...)
pattern-sinks:
- pattern: os.system(...)
This workflow is strict - do not skip steps:
languages: generic)todook and todoruleid test annotations: todoruleid: <rule-id> and todook: <rule-id> annotations in tests files for future rule improvements are forbiddenThis skill guides creation of Semgrep rules that detect security vulnerabilities and code patterns. Rules are created iteratively: analyze the problem, write tests first, analyze AST structure, write the rule, iterate until all tests pass, optimize the rule.
Approach selection:
Why prioritize taint mode? Pattern matching finds syntax but misses context. A pattern eval($X) matches both eval(user_input) (vulnerable) and eval("safe_literal") (safe). Taint mode tracks data flow, so it only alerts when untrusted data actually reaches the sink—dramatically reducing false positives for injection vulnerabilities.
Iterating between approaches: It's okay to experiment. If you start with taint mode and it's not working well (e.g., taint doesn't propagate as expected, too many false positives/negatives), switch to pattern matching. Conversely, if pattern matching produces too many false positives on safe cases, try taint mode instead. The goal is a working rule—not rigid adherence to one approach.
Output structure - exactly 2 files in a directory named after the rule-id:
<rule-id>/
├── <rule-id>.yaml # Semgrep rule
└── <rule-id>.<ext> # Test file with ruleid/ok annotations
rules:
- id: insecure-eval
languages: [python]
severity: HIGH
message: User input passed to eval() allows code execution
mode: taint
pattern-sources:
- pattern: request.args.get(...)
pattern-sinks:
- pattern: eval(...)
Test file (insecure-eval.py):
# ruleid: insecure-eval
eval(request.args.get('code'))
# ok: insecure-eval
eval("print('safe')")
Run tests (from rule directory): semgrep --test --config <rule-id>.yaml <rule-id>.<ext>
Copy this checklist and track progress:
Semgrep Rule Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Analyze the Problem
- [ ] Step 2: Write Tests First
- [ ] Step 3: Analyze AST structure
- [ ] Step 4: Write the rule
- [ ] Step 5: Iterate until all tests pass (semgrep --test)
- [ ] Step 6: Optimize the rule (remove redundancies, re-test)
- [ ] Step 7: Final Run
REQUIRED: Before writing any rule, use WebFetch to read all of these 7 links with Semgrep documentation: