# SkillAtlas: An Attack Trace Library for Agent Skills

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.13353 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.13353/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 24 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 11 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [ToolLLM: Facilitating Large Language Models to Master 16000+ Real-world APIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16789/) (2023)
- [Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02483/) (2023)
- [Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.12173/) (2023)
- [Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06674/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15817/) (2023)
- [AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09024/) (2024)
- [NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Rails](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10501/) (2023)
- [Agent Skills in the Wild: An Empirical Study of Security Vulnerabilities at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.10338/) (2026)
- [Skill-Inject: Measuring Agent Vulnerability to Skill File Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.20156/) (2026)
- [MCPEval: Automatic MCP-based Deep Evaluation for AI Agent Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.12806/) (2025)
- [Agent Skills Enable a New Class of Realistic and Trivially Simple Prompt Injections](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.26328/) (2025)
- [SkillAttack: Automated Red Teaming of Agent Skills through Attack Path Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.04989/) (2026)
- [SkillJect: Effectively Automating Skill-Based Prompt Injection for Skill-Enabled Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.14211/) (2026)
- [SkillTrojan: Backdoor Attacks on Skill-Based Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.06811/) (2026)
- [UltraEval: A Lightweight Platform for Flexible and Comprehensive Evaluation for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07584/) (2024)
- [A Comparison of Static, Dynamic, and Hybrid Analysis for Malware Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.09938/) (2022)
- [OpenEval: Benchmarking Chinese LLMs across Capability, Alignment and Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.12316/) (2024)
- [ResearStudio: A Human-Intervenable Framework for Building Controllable Deep-Research Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.12194/) (2025)
- [BotEval: Facilitating Interactive Human Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.17770/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agent skills are reusable units for language-model agents, but their risks emerge through model decisions, user context, tool calls, and execution feedback rather than through stable signatures or a single sandbox run. Existing static, dynamic, and benchmark-style evaluations rarely preserve public evidence that can be inspected, searched, and reused. We present SkillAtlas, a hosted attack trace library that converts private agent-skill security report bundles into reviewed, redacted, and searchable public cases. The library contains 3,014 cases, 6,589 traces, 151,131 steps, 233 affected skills, and 8 risk categories; 42.5% of successful cases first become successful after a non-success initial round, and trajectory-grounded labels improve pre-execution guard accuracy to 0.770.