Implements intelligent container inspector with multi-factor skill selection,
Scanned 9/4/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add paulpas/agent-skill-router --skill container-inspector --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Container Inspector?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/paulpas-container-inspector)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: container-inspector
compatibility: opencode
completeness: 95
content-types:
- guidance
- examples
- do-dont
description: Implements intelligent container inspector with multi-factor skill selection,
fallback chains, and adherence to the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense
license: MIT
maturity: stable
metadata:
domain: agent
output-format: analysis
related-skills: agent-confidence-based-selector, agent-task-routing
role: orchestration
scope: orchestration
triggers: container-inspector, container inspector, how do i container-inspector,
orchestrate container-inspector, automate container-inspector, agent container-inspector
archetypes:
- orchestration
- strategic
anti_triggers:
- brainstorming
- vague ideation
- single-agent monolith
response_profile:
verbosity: medium
directive_strength: high
abstraction_level: tactical
version: "1.0.0"
---
# Container Inspector
Orchestrates intelligent skill selection and execution for container inspector workflows. Applies the 5 Laws of Elegant Defense to guide data naturally through the orchestration pipeline, preventing errors before they occur. Selects optimal skills based on multi-factor scoring including text similarity, historical performance, and system availability.
## TL;DR Checklist
- [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Orchestration Flow │
└───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
User Request
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Parse Request │
│ & Extract │
│ Features │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Evaluate Available Skills │
│ │
│ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ ┌──────────────┐ │
│ │ Skill A │ │ Skill B │ │ Skill C │ │
│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │ - Match Score│ │
│ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │ - Confidence │ │
│ │ - History │ │ - History │ │ - History │ │
│ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ └──────┬───────┘ │
│ │ │ │ │
│ └─────────────────┴─────────────────┘ │
│ ↓ │
│ Select Best Skill │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Execute Skill │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────┐
│ Handle Result │
└────────┬────────┘
↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Error Handling & Fallback │
│ │
│ Success? ────────► Return Result │
│ │
│ Fail? ────────┐ │
│ ↓ │
│ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│ │ Fallback Chain │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ 1. Retry with adjusted parameters │ │
│ │ 2. Try Alternative Skill (if available) │ │
│ │ 3. Defer to Human Operator (if critical) │ │
│ │ 4. Log & Return Error │ │
│ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
## When to Use
Use this skill when:
- Orchestrating multi-step workflows that require skill delegation
- Implementing adaptive skill routing based on confidence scores
- Building fallback mechanisms for failed skill executions
- Creating intelligent task decomposition and parallel execution
- Designing skill dependency graphs with automatic resolution
- Implementing skill selection with historical performance weighting
- Building agent systems that need to self-organize around tasks
## When NOT to Use
Avoid this skill for:
- Direct task execution without orchestration needs - use individual skills instead
- High-frequency trading scenarios where latency must be minimized - the selection overhead may be prohibitive
- Simple linear workflows without branching or fallback requirements
- Cases where skill metadata is unavailable or unreliable
## Core Workflow
1. **Parse and Analyze Request** - Extract intent, entities, and constraints from user input.
**Checkpoint:** All required parameters must be present and in valid format before proceeding.
2. **Score Available Skills** - Calculate match scores using multi-factor algorithm:
- Text similarity between request and skill triggers
- Historical success rate for similar tasks
- Skill availability and health status
- Required dependencies and their availability
**Checkpoint:** Skip to fallback if no skill scores above threshold.
3. **Select Optimal Skill** - Choose skill with highest score that meets minimum confidence.
**Checkpoint:** Verify skill has not been disabled or deprecated.
4. **Execute with Fallback** - Run skill execution wrapped in retry and fallback logic.
**Checkpoint:** Log all execution attempts for audit trail.
5. **Return or Fallback** - Either return successful result or apply fallback chain:
- Retry with adjusted parameters
- Try alternative skill from `related-skills`
- Defer to human operator for critical tasks
**Checkpoint:** Record outcome with timing and confidence metadata.
## Implementation Patterns
### Pattern 1: Skill Selection Logic
```python
def analyze_container_manifest(
container_id: str,
inspection_targets: List[str],
min_security_score: float = 0.8
) -> Dict:
"""Analyze container manifest and runtime state for inspection readiness.
Extracts critical inspection vectors:
- Image layer composition and base OS vulnerabilities
- Runtime resource limits (CPU, memory, PID)
- Network exposure and privileged flags
- Health check configuration and restart policies
Args:
container_id: Target container ID or image reference
inspection_targets: List of inspection vectors to prioritize
min_security_score: Minimum acceptable security posture score
Returns:
Inspection readiness dict with extracted features and risk flags
"""
# Guard clause - validate container reference (Law 1)
if not container_id or not re.match(r'^[a-zA-Z0-9._-]+$', container_id):
raise ValueError(f"Invalid container reference: {container_id}")
# Parse runtime state - Make Illegal States Unrepresentable (Law 2)
runtime_state = _fetch_container_state(container_id)
if runtime_state.get("Status") == "exited":
return {"ready": False, "reason": "Container is stopped", "state": runtime_state}
inspection_features = {
"has_healthcheck": bool(runtime_state.get("Config", {}).get("Healthcheck")),
"privileged": runtime_state.get("HostConfig", {}).get("Privileged", False),
"network_mode": runtime_state.get("HostConfig", {}).get("NetworkMode"),
"resource_limits": runtime_state.get("HostConfig", {}).get("Memory"),
"base_image": runtime_state.get("Config", {}).get("Image")
}
# Calculate inspection readiness score
risk_penalty = 0.0
if inspection_features["privileged"]:
risk_penalty += 0.4
if inspection_features["network_mode"] == "host":
risk_penalty += 0.3
readiness_score = max(0.0, 1.0 - risk_penalty)
if readiness_score < min_security_score:
return {"ready": False, "score": readiness_score, "flags": ["high_risk_config"]}
# Atomic Predictability (Law 3) - Return new dict
return {
"ready": True,
"score": readiness_score,
"features": dict(inspection_features),
"timestamp": time.time()
}
```
### Pattern 2: Execution with Fallback
```python
def run_inspection_pipeline(
target: str,
scan_depth: str = "full",
max_retries: int = 2
) -> Dict:
"""Execute container inspection pipeline with resilience fallbacks.
Implements Fail Fast, Fail Loud (Law 4) for inspection operations:
- Invalid container states halt immediately
- Network timeouts for CVE databases trigger offline fallback
- No silent partial scans or corrupted manifests
Fallback chain:
1. Retry live inspection with adjusted timeout
2. Fall back to cached manifest/layer analysis
3. Defer to manual audit for critical security gaps
Args:
target: Container ID, image name, or archive path
scan_depth: 'quick', 'full', or 'deep' inspection level
max_retries: Maximum retry attempts for transient failures
Returns:
Inspection report with findings, confidence, and execution metadata
"""
# Guard clause - validate target (Early Exit)
if not target or not _is_valid_container_reference(target):
raise InspectionError(f"Invalid inspection target: {target}")
# Parse context - Ensure trusted state (Law 2)
validated_target = _resolve_target_path(target)
for attempt in range(max_retries + 1):
try:
if scan_depth == "quick":
report = _run_quick_inspect(validated_target)
else:
report = _run_full_security_scan(validated_target)
# Success - Atomic Predictability (Law 3)
return {
"success": True,
"target": validated_target,
"depth": scan_depth,
"findings": report,
"attempts": attempt + 1,
"latency_ms": _measure_execution_time()
}
except NetworkTimeoutError as e:
# CVE DB unreachable - try offline fallback
if attempt == max_retries:
return _execute_offline_manifest_scan(validated_target)
continue
except CorruptedLayerError as e:
# Fail Fast - Don't patch corrupted data (Law 4)
raise InspectionError(f"Corrupted layer in {validated_target}: {str(e)}") from e
# All retries exhausted - Fail Loud (Law 4)
raise InspectionError(f"Inspection failed for {validated_target} after {max_retries + 1} attempts")
```
### MUST DO
- Always validate skill metadata before selection (Early Exit)
- Implement fallback chain with at least 2 levels (Fallback Skill + Human)
- Log all skill selections with full context for auditability
- Return new data structures instead of mutating inputs (Atomic Predictability)
- Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states
- Update confidence scores after each execution for adaptive routing
- Reference `code-philosophy` (5 Laws of Elegant Defense) in all logic
### MUST NOT DO
- Select skills based on a single factor (e.g., only confidence score)
- Disable fallback mechanisms "temporarily" - this creates fragile systems
- Skip validation of skill dependencies before execution
- Return partial results - either complete success or clear failure
- Use magic numbers for confidence thresholds - make them configurable
- Cache skill selections without considering context changes
## TL;DR Checklist
- [ ] Parse all inputs at boundary before processing (Law 2)
- [ ] Handle edge cases with early returns at function top (Law 1)
- [ ] Fail immediately with descriptive errors on invalid states (Law 4)
- [ ] Return new data structures, never mutate inputs (Law 3)
- [ ] Implement minimum 2-level fallback chain for all skill executions
- [ ] Log all skill selections with context for full audit trail
- [ ] Validate skill metadata and dependencies before selection
- [ ] Update confidence scores after each execution for learning
## TL;DR for Code Generation
- Use guard clauses - return early on invalid input before doing work
- Return simple types (dict, str, int, bool, list) - avoid complex nested objects
- Cyclomatic complexity < 10 per function - split anything larger
- Handle null/empty cases explicitly at function top (Early Exit)
- Never mutate input parameters - return new dicts/objects
- Fail fast with descriptive errors - don't try to "patch" bad data
- Reference code-philosophy laws in comments for complex logic
- Include timing and confidence metadata in all return values
## Output Template
When applying this skill, produce:
1. **Selected Skills** - List of skill names with confidence scores
2. **Selection Rationale** - Why each skill was chosen (match score, history, availability)
3. **Execution Plan** - Order of execution with dependencies
4. **Fallback Strategy** - Which fallback skills will be tried and in what order
5. **Risk Assessment** - Any potential failure points and their impact
6. **Timing Estimates** - Expected latency including fallback scenarios
---
---
## Constraints
### MUST DO
- Define clear input/output contracts for every step in the orchestration flow with explicit validation
- Implement structured logging at each stage capturing context, inputs, outputs, timing, and errors
- Build in fallback paths: if the primary strategy fails, degrade gracefully to a simpler approach
- Validate all preconditions before starting — do not proceed if required resources or permissions are missing
### MUST NOT DO
- Do not create deep nesting of orchestration steps (>5 levels) — flatten workflows where possible
- Avoid silent failure modes: every step must either succeed, fail explicitly, or escalate to a higher handler
- Never use shared mutable state between parallel workflow branches — communicate via immutable messages only
- Do not hardcode execution order when the dependency graph naturally determines it; derive order from explicit dependencies
## Live References
> Authoritative documentation links for this skill's domain. The model follows markdown links at load time to resolve external references and inline content.
- [Docker Security Best Practices](<https://docs.docker.com/security/>)
- [Container Scanning with Trivy](<https://aquasecurity.github.io/trivy/>)
- [CIS Docker Benchmark](<https://www.cisecurity.org/benchmark/docker>)
- [Open Container Initiative (OCI) Specs](<https://opencontainers.org/>)
- [Kubernetes Pod Security Standards](<https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/security/pod-security-standards/>)
## Related Skills
| Skill | Purpose |
|Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!