Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add 2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver --skill competition-container-runtimegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolverWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver/competition-container-runtime)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver/competition-container-runtime"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver/competition-container-runtime/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver/competition-container-runtime"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver/competition-container-runtime.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00109 | $0.00684 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00044 | $0.00274 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00137 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
competition-container-runtime scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to competition-container-runtime — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 52 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Competition Container Runtime
Use this skill only as a downstream specialization after $ctf-sandbox-orchestrator is already active and has established sandbox assumptions, node ownership, and evidence priorities. If that has not happened yet, return to $ctf-sandbox-orchestrator first.
Use this skill when the challenge is really about what the live container or pod is doing now, not what the checked-in manifest claims it should do.
Reply in Simplified Chinese unless the user explicitly requests English.
Quick Start
- Split intent from reality: manifest, image, startup, live mount, live route, live process.
- Map host -> proxy -> container or pod -> mounted volume -> consuming process.
- Keep secrets, rendered config, init output, and sidecar output separate from static manifests.
- Prove one minimal live path from mounted or injected state to reachable behavior.
- Reproduce the effect with the smallest runtime-specific chain.
Workflow
1. Map The Live Runtime
- Compare compose or kube manifests against running containers, pods, mounted volumes, env, sidecars, init containers, and entrypoints.
- Identify which process actually consumes the mounted secret, rendered config, or shared volume output.
2. Trace Route And Mount Boundaries
- Map virtual host, reverse proxy, service, container port, filesystem mount, and runtime-generated file paths together.
- Record whether the decisive state is image-baked, env-injected, mounted later, or written by an init/sidecar process.
3. Report The Runtime Deviation
- State the earliest point where live runtime diverges from checked-in intent.
- Keep one compact evidence chain from manifest or compose intent to live consumer behavior.
Read This Reference
- Load
references/container-runtime.mdfor the runtime checklist, mount-chain checklist, and common live-vs-static pitfalls. - If the hard part is kube API permissions, service-account trust, RBAC edges, admission mutations, or controller-created workload drift, prefer
$competition-k8s-control-plane. - If the hard part is Host-header routing, path-prefix rewriting, or route-to-service mapping across nodes, prefer
$competition-runtime-routing. - If the hard part is proving container-to-host crossover, kernel attack-surface preconditions, or stable escape primitives, prefer
$competition-kernel-container-escape. - If the hard part is replaying Linux secrets, socket trust edges, or host-to-host pivots after container foothold, prefer
$competition-linux-credential-pivot.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 52 lines · 109 tokens per session scan A 87412c06f8ca
competition-container-runtime is a skill published in the GitHub repository 2233admin/reverse-skill-evolver (17 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 109 tokens to every session and 684 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to competition-container-runtime, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
ci-cd-expert
Enterprise CI/CD, optimization, security, & delivery expert. Covers GHA, GitLab CI, Jenkins, monorepos (Turbo, Nx, Bazel), containers (BuildKit, Kaniko), GitOps (Argo), delivery (Spinnaker, Kayenta, Fastlane, Flyway), OIDC, and Android. Use for: pipelines, caching, GitOps, monorepos, OIDC, DB migrations, mobile…
apple-container-expert
Expert guide for Apple's native container CLI (apple/container) — the open-source, Swift-native, VM-per-container runtime for Apple Silicon macOS. Read this skill BEFORE answering any question about: installing or starting apple/container; container run/build/machine/volume/network commands; configuring config.toml…
android-reverse-engineering
Decompile Android APK, XAPK, JAR, and AAR files using jadx or Fernflower/Vineflower. Reverse engineer Android apps, extract HTTP API endpoints, trace call flows from UI to network layer, and analyze runtime behavior with Frida, network capture, JNI/SO inspection, and signature generation. Use when the user wants to…
android-reverse-engineering
Decompile Android APK, XAPK, JAR, and AAR files using jadx or Fernflower/Vineflower. Reverse engineer Android apps, extract HTTP API endpoints, trace call flows from UI to network layer, and analyze runtime behavior with Frida, network capture, JNI/SO inspection, and signature generation. Use when the user wants to…
supply-chain-security
Use for software supply-chain security assessment covering SBOM, SCA, CI/CD pipelines, container images, build integrity, dependency provenance, and vulnerability reachability.
competition-agent-cloud
Internal downstream skill for ctf-sandbox-orchestrator. CTF-sandbox workflow for AI-agent, prompt-injection, MCP or toolchain, cloud, container, CI/CD, and supply-chain challenges. Use when the user asks to analyze prompt-to-tool flows, retrieval poisoning, mounted secrets, deployment drift, runtime-vs-manifest…