by masci · LLM Plugin · ★ 128
Last updated: · Indexed by AgentSkillsHub · Auto-synced every 8h
pip install banks
pip install "banks[all]"Taken from the project's README on GitHub.
None of the 42 rules matched — no credential harvesting, no data exfiltration, no curl-pipe-shell installer. Scanned against 42 published rules built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy, refreshed every 8 hours.
The quality score combines nine heuristic checks of the repo and its README: completeness, clarity, specificity, examples, structure, agent readiness, step-by-step content, instruction quality and security notes. It rates how well the project explains itself to an agent, not the code.
| Stars | 128 |
| Forks | 21 |
| Language | Python |
| Category | LLM Plugin |
| License | MIT |
| Quality Score | 71/100 |
| Open Issues | 1 |
| Last Updated | 2026-09-10 |
| Created | 2023-06-04 |
| Platforms | python |
| Est. Tokens | ~16k |
banks Banks) is the linguist professor who will help you generate meaningful LLM prompts using a template language that makes sense. If you're still using for the job, keep reading. Docs are availab
Looking for a banks alternative? If you're comparing banks with other llm plugin tools, these 6 projects are the closest alternatives on Agent Skills Hub — ranked by topic overlap, star count, and community traction.
A handy lib for smooth interaction with large language models (LLMs) and crafting AI apps.
The only fully local production-grade Super SDK that provides a simple, unified, and powerful interface for ca
Run LLM prompts from your shell
✨Lightweight LLM Client with MCP 🔌 & Characters 👤
Open-source versioning, tracing, and annotation tooling.
An Automated AI-Powered Prompt Optimization Framework
Explore other popular llm plugin tools:
Grades come from a rule-based scan built on the SlowMist agent-security taxonomy: 42 published rules, covering credential harvesting, data exfiltration, curl | sh installers and more. It is a first-layer scan, not a manual audit — we say so rather than overstate it.
The scale of the problem is documented independently: Liu et al. (2026), in a study of 31,132 agent skills, report that 26.1% contain security vulnerabilities. Our own full-catalog census is published as a citable open dataset.
Sources & who's responsible: