performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review▌
mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills · updated May 25, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Performs OAuth 2.0 scope minimization review to identify over-permissioned third-party application integrations, excessive API scopes, unused token grants, and risky OAuth consent patterns across identity providers and SaaS platforms. Activates for requests involving OAuth scope audit, API permission review, third-party app risk assessment, or consent grant minimization.
| name | performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review |
| description | 'Performs OAuth 2.0 scope minimization review to identify over-permissioned third-party application integrations, excessive API scopes, unused token grants, and risky OAuth consent patterns across identity providers and SaaS platforms. Activates for requests involving OAuth scope audit, API permission review, third-party app risk assessment, or consent grant minimization. ' |
| domain | cybersecurity |
| subdomain | identity-access-management |
| tags | - OAuth - scope-minimization - API-security - consent-review - third-party-risk - token-audit |
| version | '1.0' |
| author | mahipal |
| license | Apache-2.0 |
| nist_csf | - PR.AA-01 - PR.AA-02 - PR.AA-05 - PR.AA-06 |
Performing OAuth Scope Minimization Review
When to Use
- Annual or quarterly review of third-party application OAuth permissions
- After a security incident involving compromised OAuth tokens or unauthorized data access
- Compliance audit requiring documentation of third-party data access (GDPR Article 28, SOC 2)
- Discovery of shadow IT applications accessing organizational data via OAuth grants
- Migration or consolidation of SaaS applications requiring permission cleanup
- Implementing least-privilege principle for API integrations
Do not use for reviewing first-party application permissions within the same trust boundary; OAuth scope minimization focuses on third-party and cross-boundary consent grants.
Prerequisites
- Admin access to identity providers (Microsoft Entra ID, Okta, Google Workspace)
- Microsoft Graph API permissions: Application.Read.All, OAuth2PermissionGrant.ReadWrite.All
- Inventory of approved third-party integrations from procurement or IT governance
- OAuth scope risk classification framework
- Tools for token analysis (jwt.io for manual review, automated scripts for bulk analysis)
Workflow
Step 1: Inventory All OAuth Grants and Consent Permissions
Enumerate all OAuth application registrations and delegated permissions:
"""
OAuth Grant Inventory - Microsoft Entra ID
Enumerates all application registrations, service principals,
and delegated/application permission grants.
"""
import requests
import json
from collections import defaultdict
class EntraOAuthAuditor:
def __init__(self, tenant_id, client_id, client_secret):
self.tenant_id = tenant_id
self.base_url = "https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0"
self.token = self._get_token(client_id, client_secret)
self.headers = {"Authorization": f"Bearer {self.token}"}
def _get_token(self, client_id, client_secret):
url = f"https://login.microsoftonline.com/{self.tenant_id}/oauth2/v2.0/token"
response = requests.post(url, data={
"grant_type": "client_credentials",
"client_id": client_id,
"client_secret": client_secret,
"scope": "https://graph.microsoft.com/.default"
})
return response.json()["access_token"]
def get_all_service_principals(self):
"""Get all service principals (enterprise applications)."""
apps = []
url = f"{self.base_url}/servicePrincipals?$top=999&$select=id,appId,displayName,appOwnerOrganizationId,servicePrincipalType,accountEnabled,createdDateTime"
while url:
response = requests.get(url, headers=self.headers)
data = response.json()
apps.extend(data.get("value", []))
url = data.get("@odata.nextLink")
return apps
def get_oauth2_permission_grants(self):
"""Get all delegated permission grants (user consent)."""
grants = []
url = f"{self.base_url}/oauth2PermissionGrants?$top=999"
while url:
response = requests.get(url, headers=self.headers)
data = response.json()
grants.extend(data.get("value", []))
url = data.get("@odata.nextLink")
return grants
def get_app_role_assignments(self, sp_id):
"""Get application permission assignments for a service principal."""
url = f"{self.base_url}/servicePrincipals/{sp_id}/appRoleAssignments"
response = requests.get(url, headers=self.headers)
return response.json().get("value", [])
def build_permission_inventory(self):
"""Build comprehensive OAuth permission inventory."""
service_principals = self.get_all_service_principals()
delegated_grants = self.get_oauth2_permission_grants()
# Map service principal IDs to names
sp_map = {sp["id"]: sp for sp in service_principals}
inventory = []
# Process delegated permissions
for grant in delegated_grants:
sp = sp_map.get(grant["clientId"], {})
scopes = grant.get("scope", "").split()
for scope in scopes:
if not scope:
continue
inventory.append({
"app_name": sp.get("displayName", "Unknown"),
"app_id": grant.get("clientId"),
"publisher_tenant": sp.get("appOwnerOrganizationId"),
"is_third_party": sp.get("appOwnerOrganizationId") != self.tenant_id,
"permission_type": "Delegated",
"scope": scope,
"consent_type": grant.get("consentType"), # AllPrincipals or Principal
"principal_id": grant.get("principalId"),
"granted_date": sp.get("createdDateTime"),
"is_enabled": sp.get("accountEnabled", True)
})
# Process application permissions
for sp in service_principals:
app_roles = self.get_app_role_assignments(sp["id"])
for role in app_roles:
inventory.append({
"app_name": sp.get("displayName"),
"app_id": sp.get("id"),
"publisher_tenant": sp.get("appOwnerOrganizationId"),
"is_third_party": sp.get("appOwnerOrganizationId") != self.tenant_id,
"permission_type": "Application",
"scope": role.get("appRoleId"),
"consent_type": "AdminConsent",
"granted_date": role.get("createdDateTime"),
"is_enabled": sp.get("accountEnabled", True)
})
return inventory
Step 2: Classify OAuth Scopes by Risk Level
Categorize permissions based on data access sensitivity:
"""
OAuth Scope Risk Classification
Maps API scopes to risk levels based on data sensitivity and access breadth.
"""
MICROSOFT_GRAPH_SCOPE_RISK = {
# CRITICAL - Full administrative or unrestricted access
"critical": {
"scopes": [
"Directory.ReadWrite.All",
"RoleManagement.ReadWrite.Directory",
"Application.ReadWrite.All",
"AppRoleAssignment.ReadWrite.All",
"Mail.ReadWrite",
"Mail.Send",
"Files.ReadWrite.All",
"Sites.FullControl.All",
"User.ReadWrite.All",
"Group.ReadWrite.All",
"MailboxSettings.ReadWrite",
"full_access_as_app",
],
"risk_description": "Can read/write all data, modify directory, or impersonate users",
"review_frequency": "Monthly",
"requires_admin_consent": True
},
# HIGH - Broad read access or sensitive data write
"high": {
"scopes": [
"Mail.Read",
"Mail.Read.Shared",
"Calendars.ReadWrite",
"Contacts.ReadWrite",
"Files.Read.All",
"Sites.Read.All",
"User.Read.All",
"Group.Read.All",
"Directory.Read.All",
"AuditLog.Read.All",
"SecurityEvents.ReadWrite.All",
"TeamSettings.ReadWrite.All",
],
"risk_description": "Broad read access to sensitive organizational data",
"review_frequency": "Quarterly",
"requires_admin_consent": True
},
# MEDIUM - Scoped data access
"medium": {
"scopes": [
"Calendars.Read",
"Contacts.Read",
"Files.ReadWrite",
"Sites.ReadWrite.All",
"Tasks.ReadWrite",
"Notes.ReadWrite.All",
"Chat.ReadWrite",
"ChannelMessage.Send",
"Team.ReadBasic.All",
],
"risk_description": "Scoped access to specific data types with write capability",
"review_frequency": "Semi-annually"
},
# LOW - Minimal or user-profile only access
"low": {
"scopes": [
"User.Read",
"openid",
"profile",
"email",
"offline_access",
"Calendars.Read.Shared",
"People.Read",
"User.ReadBasic.All",
],
"risk_description": "Basic user profile or minimal scoped access",
"review_frequency": "Annually"
}
}
def classify_scope_risk(scope):
"""Classify a single OAuth scope by risk level."""
for risk_level, config in MICROSOFT_GRAPH_SCOPE_RISK.items():
if scope in config["scopes"]:
return {
"scope": scope,
"risk_level": risk_level,
"description": config["risk_description"],
"review_frequency": config["review_frequency"]
}
# Unknown scopes default to HIGH risk
return {
"scope": scope,
"risk_level": "high",
"description": "Unknown scope - requires manual classification",
"review_frequency": "Quarterly"
}
def analyze_app_risk(app_permissions):
"""Calculate aggregate risk score for an application's permissions."""
risk_weights = {"critical": 40, "high": 20, "medium": 10, "low": 2}
total_score = 0
classified_scopes = []
for perm in app_permissions:
classification = classify_scope_risk(perm["scope"])
classified_scopes.append(classification)
total_score += risk_weights.get(classification["risk_level"], 10)
# Bonus risk for application (vs delegated) permissions
app_type_permissions = [p for p in app_permissions if p["permission_type"] == "Application"]
total_score += len(app_type_permissions) * 15
# Bonus risk for admin-consented broad access
admin_consent = [p for p in app_permissions if p["consent_type"] == "AllPrincipals"]
total_score += len(admin_consent) * 10
if total_score >= 100:
aggregate_risk = "CRITICAL"
elif total_score >= 60:
aggregate_risk = "HIGH"
elif total_score >= 30:
aggregate_risk = "MEDIUM"
else:
aggregate_risk = "LOW"
return {
"total_score": total_score,
"aggregate_risk": aggregate_risk,
"scope_count": len(app_permissions),
"critical_scopes": len([s for s in classified_scopes if s["risk_level"] == "critical"]),
"high_scopes": len([s for s in classified_scopes if s["risk_level"] == "high"]),
"classified_scopes": classified_scopes
}
Step 3: Identify Over-Permissioned Applications
Detect apps requesting more permissions than functionally needed:
"""
Over-Permission Detection
Identifies applications with excessive OAuth scopes relative to their function.
"""
def detect_over_permissions(inventory, approved_apps_catalog):
"""
Compare actual permissions against approved scope catalog
to find over-permissioned applications.
"""
findings = []
# Group permissions by application
app_permissions = defaultdict(list)
for perm in inventory:
app_permissions[perm["app_name"]].append(perm)
for app_name, permissions in app_permissions.items():
# Check against approved catalog
approved = approved_apps_catalog.get(app_name)
if not approved:
# Unknown/unapproved application
findings.append({
"app_name": app_name,
"finding_type": "UNAPPROVED_APPLICATION",
"severity": "HIGH",
"detail": f"Application not in approved catalog with {len(permissions)} permission grants",
"scopes": [p["scope"] for p in permissions],
"recommendation": "Review and approve or revoke all permissions"
})
continue
approved_scopes = set(approved.get("approved_scopes", []))
actual_scopes = set(p["scope"] for p in permissions)
# Find excessive scopes (granted but not approved)
excessive = actual_scopes - approved_scopes
if excessive:
risk = analyze_app_risk([p for p in permissions if p["scope"] in excessive])
findings.append({
"app_name": app_name,
"finding_type": "EXCESSIVE_SCOPES",
"severity": risk["aggregate_risk"],
"detail": f"{len(excessive)} scopes beyond approved list",
"excessive_scopes": list(excessive),
"approved_scopes": list(approved_scopes),
"recommendation": "Remove excessive scopes or update approved catalog"
})
# Find unused scopes (approved but activity logs show no API calls)
# This requires API activity log correlation
unused = approved_scopes - actual_scopes
if unused:
findings.append({
"app_name": app_name,
"finding_type": "UNUSED_APPROVED_SCOPES",
"severity": "LOW",
"detail": f"{len(unused)} approved scopes not currently granted",
"unused_scopes": list(unused)
})
# Check for overly broad permissions
broad_patterns = [
("Mail.ReadWrite", "Mail.Read", "Write access to mail when only read needed"),
("Files.ReadWrite.All", "Files.Read.All", "Write access to all files when only read needed"),
("Directory.ReadWrite.All", "Directory.Read.All", "Write access to directory when only read needed"),
("User.ReadWrite.All", "User.Read.All", "Write access to users when only read needed"),
]
for broad, narrow, description in broad_patterns:
if broad in actual_scopes:
findings.append({
"app_name": app_name,
"finding_type": "OVERLY_BROAD_SCOPE",
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"detail": description,
"current_scope": broad,
"recommended_scope": narrow,
"recommendation": f"Downgrade from {broad} to {narrow}"
})
return findings
Step 4: Audit Token Usage and Detect Stale Grants
Identify OAuth tokens that are no longer actively used:
"""
Token Usage Audit
Analyzes sign-in logs and API activity to identify stale OAuth grants.
"""
def audit_token_usage(auditor, days_inactive=90):
"""Identify OAuth grants with no recent API activity."""
# Get sign-in activity for service principals
url = f"{auditor.base_url}/auditLogs/signIns"
params = {
"$filter": f"createdDateTime ge {(datetime.utcnow() - timedelta(days=days_inactive)).isoformat()}Z and signInEventTypes/any(t: t eq 'servicePrincipal')",
"$top": 999
}
active_apps = set()
while url:
response = requests.get(url, headers=auditor.headers, params=params)
data = response.json()
for signin in data.get("value", []):
active_apps.add(signin.get("appId"))
url = data.get("@odata.nextLink")
params = {}
# Compare against all granted apps
all_grants = auditor.get_oauth2_permission_grants()
sp_map = {sp["id"]: sp for sp in auditor.get_all_service_principals()}
stale_grants = []
for grant in all_grants:
sp = sp_map.get(grant["clientId"], {})
app_id = sp.get("appId")
if app_id and app_id not in active_apps:
stale_grants.append({
"app_name": sp.get("displayName", "Unknown"),
"app_id": app_id,
"scopes": grant.get("scope", "").split(),
"consent_type": grant.get("consentType"),
"is_third_party": sp.get("appOwnerOrganizationId") != auditor.tenant_id,
"days_inactive": days_inactive,
"recommendation": "Revoke - no API activity in {days_inactive} days"
})
return sorted(stale_grants, key=lambda x: len(x["scopes"]), reverse=True)
Step 5: Generate Remediation Plan and Execute Scope Reduction
Create and execute the scope minimization remediation plan:
"""
OAuth Scope Remediation
Generates and executes scope reduction actions.
"""
def generate_remediation_plan(findings, stale_grants):
"""Create prioritized remediation plan."""
plan = []
# Priority 1: Revoke unapproved applications
for f in findings:
if f["finding_type"] == "UNAPPROVED_APPLICATION":
plan.append({
"priority": 1,
"action": "REVOKE_ALL_PERMISSIONS",
"app_name": f["app_name"],
"reason": "Unapproved third-party application",
"impact": f"Removes {len(f['scopes'])} permission grants",
"risk_if_not_addressed": "CRITICAL"
})
# Priority 2: Remove excessive scopes from approved apps
for f in findings:
if f["finding_type"] == "EXCESSIVE_SCOPES":
plan.append({
"priority": 2,
"action": "REMOVE_EXCESSIVE_SCOPES",
"app_name": f["app_name"],
"scopes_to_remove": f["excessive_scopes"],
"reason": "Scopes beyond approved catalog",
"risk_if_not_addressed": f["severity"]
})
# Priority 3: Downgrade overly broad scopes
for f in findings:
if f["finding_type"] == "OVERLY_BROAD_SCOPE":
plan.append({
"priority": 3,
"action": "DOWNGRADE_SCOPE",
"app_name": f["app_name"],
"current_scope": f["current_scope"],
"target_scope": f["recommended_scope"],
"reason": f["detail"],
"risk_if_not_addressed": "MEDIUM"
})
# Priority 4: Revoke stale grants
for grant in stale_grants:
plan.append({
"priority": 4,
"action": "REVOKE_STALE_GRANT",
"app_name": grant["app_name"],
"scopes_to_revoke": grant["scopes"],
"reason": f"No API activity in {grant['days_inactive']} days",
"risk_if_not_addressed": "MEDIUM"
})
return sorted(plan, key=lambda x: x["priority"])
def execute_scope_reduction(auditor, grant_id, scopes_to_remove):
"""Remove specific scopes from an OAuth permission grant."""
# Get current grant
url = f"{auditor.base_url}/oauth2PermissionGrants/{grant_id}"
response = requests.get(url, headers=auditor.headers)
current_grant = response.json()
current_scopes = set(current_grant.get("scope", "").split())
updated_scopes = current_scopes - set(scopes_to_remove)
if not updated_scopes:
# Remove entire grant
requests.delete(url, headers=auditor.headers)
return {"action": "grant_deleted", "grant_id": grant_id}
else:
# Update with reduced scopes
update_body = {"scope": " ".join(updated_scopes)}
requests.patch(url, headers=auditor.headers, json=update_body)
return {
"action": "scopes_reduced",
"grant_id": grant_id,
"removed": list(scopes_to_remove),
"remaining": list(updated_scopes)
}
Key Concepts
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| OAuth Scope | Permission string defining the specific API access level granted to a client application (e.g., Mail.Read, Files.ReadWrite.All) |
| Delegated Permission | OAuth scope exercised on behalf of a signed-in user, limited by both the app's permissions and the user's own access rights |
| Application Permission | OAuth scope granted directly to the application without user context, providing access to all users' data (high risk) |
| Admin Consent | Tenant-wide permission grant made by an administrator that applies to all users without individual consent |
| Scope Minimization | Security principle of reducing OAuth permissions to the minimum set required for application functionality |
| Stale Grant | OAuth permission that remains active but has no recent API usage, indicating the integration is abandoned or deprecated |
Tools & Systems
- Microsoft Entra Admin Center: Portal for reviewing enterprise applications, consent permissions, and OAuth grant management
- Nudge Security: SaaS security platform for discovering OAuth grants, assessing third-party risk, and automating scope reviews
- Cerby: Non-SSO application management platform for auditing OAuth integrations and managing shared accounts
- Microsoft Graph API: Programmatic interface for enumerating and modifying OAuth permission grants at scale
Common Scenarios
Scenario: Post-Breach OAuth Scope Audit
Context: After a phishing attack compromised an admin account, investigation reveals the attacker registered a malicious OAuth application with Mail.ReadWrite and Files.ReadWrite.All scopes, exfiltrating 6 months of email. The organization needs a comprehensive OAuth scope review.
Approach:
- Immediately revoke all OAuth grants from the compromised admin session
- Enumerate all service principals and permission grants across the tenant
- Flag all applications registered in the last 90 days for manual review
- Classify all third-party application scopes using the risk framework
- Identify applications with critical scopes (Mail.ReadWrite, Files.ReadWrite.All, Directory.ReadWrite.All)
- Cross-reference against approved application catalog from IT procurement
- Revoke all unapproved applications immediately
- Downgrade over-permissioned approved applications to minimum required scopes
- Implement admin consent workflow to prevent future uncontrolled OAuth grants
- Enable consent policy requiring admin approval for high-risk scopes
Pitfalls:
- Revoking permissions for business-critical integrations without coordination causes service disruption
- Not checking for application-level permissions (vs delegated) which are higher risk and often overlooked
- Missing multi-tenant applications where the publisher tenant differs from the consuming tenant
- Not implementing ongoing monitoring to detect new unauthorized OAuth grants after remediation
Output Format
OAUTH SCOPE MINIMIZATION REVIEW REPORT
=========================================
Tenant: corp.onmicrosoft.com
Review Period: 2026-02-01 to 2026-02-24
Total Applications: 147
Third-Party Apps: 98
First-Party Apps: 49
PERMISSION INVENTORY
Total OAuth Grants: 487
Delegated Permissions: 312
Application Permissions: 175
Admin-Consented: 89
User-Consented: 223
RISK CLASSIFICATION
Critical Risk Apps: 7
- UnknownCRMApp (Mail.ReadWrite, Files.ReadWrite.All - UNAPPROVED)
- LegacySync (Directory.ReadWrite.All - EXCESSIVE)
- DevToolX (Application.ReadWrite.All - OVERLY BROAD)
High Risk Apps: 18
Medium Risk Apps: 34
Low Risk Apps: 88
FINDINGS
Unapproved Applications: 12 (REVOKE IMMEDIATELY)
Excessive Scopes: 23 apps with scopes beyond approved list
Overly Broad Permissions: 15 apps that can be downgraded
Stale Grants (90+ days): 31 apps with no recent API activity
REMEDIATION PLAN
Priority 1 (Immediate): 12 unapproved app revocations
Priority 2 (This Week): 23 excessive scope removals
Priority 3 (This Month
How to use performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review from GitHub repository mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Installation Steps
- 1.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.4★★★★★59 reviews- ★★★★★Diya Rao· Dec 28, 2024
Registry listing for performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Diya Patel· Dec 8, 2024
performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Tariq Thomas· Dec 4, 2024
performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Valentina Abebe· Dec 4, 2024
performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Aisha Martinez· Nov 27, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Lucas Sharma· Nov 23, 2024
We added performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Aditi Garcia· Nov 23, 2024
We added performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Kaira Choi· Nov 19, 2024
performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Hassan Singh· Oct 18, 2024
We added performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Zara Choi· Oct 14, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: performing-oauth-scope-minimization-review is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 59