Compare · Methodology
evaluation-methodology vs skill-security-auditor
Which methodology skill is right for you?
Notable score gap. skill-security-auditor scores meaningfully higher; see individual reviews for nuance.
01 — TL;DR
If you need trigger clarity above all else, pick skill-security-auditor (4.3/5). evaluation-methodology (3.1/5) is a reasonable alternative if you're already in its source ecosystem. They overlap in methodology skill territory.
Side by side
3.1/5
4.3/5
Where they differ
- Trigger clarity. trigger clarity: skill-security-auditor is clearly stronger (4.5 vs 5.0). For workloads where this dimension matters, prefer skill-security-auditor.
- Output specificity. output specificity: evaluation-methodology is clearly stronger (4.0 vs 3.5). For workloads where this dimension matters, prefer evaluation-methodology.
- Scope precision. scope precision: evaluation-methodology and skill-security-auditor score essentially the same (4.5 vs 4.5). Neither has an edge here.
- Self-containment. self-containment: evaluation-methodology and skill-security-auditor score essentially the same (4.0 vs 4.0). Neither has an edge here.
- Reusability. reusability: skill-security-auditor is clearly stronger (3.5 vs 4.0). For workloads where this dimension matters, prefer skill-security-auditor.
Which to pick
When to choose evaluation-methodology
- Your workload emphasizes output specificity — evaluation-methodology scores 4.0 vs 3.5 here.
- You weight community adoption — evaluation-methodology's upstream repo has 35,544 stars vs 15,142.
- The methodology skill convention you're working in matches evaluation-methodology's scope.
When to choose skill-security-auditor
- Your workload emphasizes trigger clarity — skill-security-auditor scores 4.5 vs 5.0 here.
- Your workload emphasizes reusability — skill-security-auditor scores 3.5 vs 4.0 here.
- The methodology skill convention you're working in matches skill-security-auditor's scope.
Scenario by scenario
| Scenario | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Agent must auto-select between many methodology skills | skill-security-auditor | Trigger clarity decides — clearer triggers reduce routing errors. |
| Output must be a specific file format or structured data | evaluation-methodology | Output specificity determines whether downstream tools can rely on the result. |
| Skill must be readable and complete out of the box | either | Self-containment matters when you're not the original author. |
| Cross-team or cross-project reuse expected | skill-security-auditor | Reusability separates one-off scripts from durable building blocks. |
Common questions
- Which is better, evaluation-methodology or skill-security-auditor?
- skill-security-auditor ranks higher overall (4.3 vs 3.1 on our 0–5 rubric). That said, the better choice depends on which dimensions matter most for your use case.
- Are evaluation-methodology and skill-security-auditor both free to use?
- Both skills are free and open-source (or freely licensed). evaluation-methodology: See source repo. skill-security-auditor: See source repo. Installation has no cost; usage costs depend on the underlying LLM tokens consumed when you invoke the skill.
- Can I install both evaluation-methodology and skill-security-auditor at the same time?
- Yes. Agent skills are not exclusive — an agent runtime (Claude Code, Codex, etc.) can have many skills installed and route to whichever matches the current task. Installing both is a low-cost way to keep your options open.
- Where do these skills come from?
- evaluation-methodology is sourced from skillsmp.com (curated marketplace). skill-security-auditor is sourced from skillsmp.com (curated marketplace). We verify each skill across multiple sources where possible; evaluation-methodology appears in 1 source, skill-security-auditor in 1.