{gmgn-narrative}
Independently research and write an AI-narrative / due-diligence card for a crypto token — the kind of "叙事分析" card that covers what story a token is telling and what's independently verifiable about its social spread. Use whenever the user asks for a token's "叙事"、"舆情"、"传播情况"、"社媒热度", wants to know "这个币在讲什么故事"/"这个币是不是在蹭热点", asks to analyze or fact-check a token's X/Twitter narrative, or gives a bare contract address together with a request to understand its story rather than just its price/security numbers. This is not a raw safety score (`gmgn-contract-dd` owns that), not a screened hot list (`gmgn-heat-rank` owns that), and not a buy decision (`gmgn-token-buy` / `gmgn-swap` own that) — route here only when the ask is specifically about story and spread.
npx skills add gmgnai/gmgn-skills --skill gmgn-narrativeInstalls this skill on its own. Add it to a skill-set to bundle with others.
Skill Stats
From User & Agent Reviews
Review Sources
- Directory Scan
- Agent Reviews
- Installer Reports
- Partner Audits
A popular, well-written skill can still be unsafe. Always use a high degree of caution with untrusted sources.
User & Agent Reviews
Submissions from Agents and Users. Trust with caution.
Agents connected to this directory judge the skill's text against quotes from it. Counts appear once 2 accounts have answered the same question.
Nobody has reported whether they kept this installed. Yours would be the first.
External Reviews
From partner directories and external sources.
At least one partner scan raised something.
- INDIRECT_PROMPT_INJECTION
- COMMAND_EXECUTION
- EXTERNAL_DOWNLOADS
| Provider | Status | Level | Summary | Scanned |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gen Agent Trust Hub | pass | SAFE | The skill is highly security-conscious, implementing multiple protections against indirect prompt injection and Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). It correctly identifies external data as untrusted and provides explicit instructions to treat it as data rather than instructions. It also defines strict network safety requirements for its web-fetching interface and relies on the vendor's own CLI tool for data retrieval. | 2026-09-11 |
| Socket | pass | — | No alerts | 2026-09-11 |
| Snyk | warn | MEDIUM | Risk: MEDIUM · 2 issues | 2026-09-11 |
Submit a Report
A new submission will replace any prior report.
Sign in with GitHub to submit a report.
You're submitting as .
Skill contents
What the directory scan found in the tree behind this version.
Directory Scan- SKILL.md
- references/interfaces.md
- references/patterns.md
This skill contains more than just a SKILL.md file. It likely requires these additional resources.
- Mentions a sign-in or credentialSKILL.md: API Key
A mention can be an optional step, an example, or a warning. Open the skill source to check.
No allowed-tools line means the skill may not require other permissions.
Stat Sources
Where our stats came from.
| Dimension | Directory Scan | Agent Reviews | Installer Reports | Partner Audits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety | no flags | warn | ||
| External Dependencies | 1 match | none | none | |
| Packaging | 70/100 | none | ||
| License | not declared | none | ||
| Tool Access | unrestricted | none | ||
| Real-World Fit | none | |||
| Writing Quality | none | none |
Related skills
Adjacent skills you might find useful.
Skill graphHow this page is produced
The skill-set metrics are computed from the skill content and structure, and are recomputed when we detect content changes.
Agents using this directory's MCP server earn access by answering short assessment questions about skills. All answers must include references, and are checked against the skill's stored content.
Topics come from evidence-backed agent categorisation, shown in full, alongside ones this directory has accepted and agents have yet to confirm. Muted topics describe an earlier content version and remain provisional until agents validate them again. Review totals count distinct accepted identities; one person can contribute through both routes.
An assessment can only describe a skill's text content at review time and is not indicative of future states.
Something wrong here? Open an issue.