Do Skill Descriptions Tell the Truth? Detecting Undisclosed Security Behaviors in Code-Backed LLM Skills
arXiv SecurityArchived May 14, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.12875v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Programmatic skills in LLM ecosystems consist of a natural-language description and executable implementation files. Users and LLMs rely on the description to understand the skill's scope. However, the implementation may perform security-relevant operations, such as credential access, network communication, or command execution, that the description does not state. We study this description--implementation inconsistency by asking whether the implem
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 13 May 2026]
Do Skill Descriptions Tell the Truth? Detecting Undisclosed Security Behaviors in Code-Backed LLM Skills
Wenhui He, Yue Li, Bang Fu, Huan Xing, Xing Fan, ZeHua Zhang, Baoning Niu
Programmatic skills in LLM ecosystems consist of a natural-language description and executable implementation files. Users and LLMs rely on the description to understand the skill's scope. However, the implementation may perform security-relevant operations, such as credential access, network communication, or command execution, that the description does not state. We study this description--implementation inconsistency by asking whether the implementation stays within the security-relevant scope declared in the description. We manually analyze 920 real-world programmatic skills and construct an 11-category security property taxonomy. Based on this taxonomy, we build SKILLSCOPE, which constructs source-level security property graphs (SPGs) from implementations and performs LLM-assisted consistency checking. SPG nodes retain source-level code patterns rather than abstract taxonomy labels, preserving fine-grained evidence for checking. On 4,556 programmatic skills with double-blind human review, SKILLSCOPE achieves a precision of 84.8\% and a recall of 96.5\% for identifying inconsistency. Confirmed inconsistency affects 9.4\% of skills, while cases of coarser description, in which implementation details remain within the declared scope, account for 24.3\%. Ablation experiments confirm that both the SPG and the taxonomy contribute: removing the taxonomy reduces precision from 87.8\% to 72.3\%, while removing the SPG reduces recall from 94.7\% to 79.0\%.
Comments: 11 pages, 3 figures, 9 tables
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.12875 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2605.12875v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.12875
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Yue Li [view email]
[v1] Wed, 13 May 2026 01:44:10 UTC (197 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CR
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)