Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

giskard-llm

Authors and runs Giskard LLM scans - adversarial test-case generation for LLM applications via `giskard.scan(model)` covering 7 vulnerability categories (hallucination, harmful_content, prompt_injection, sensitive_information_disclosure, stereotypes, robustness, basic_sycophancy); wraps any callable model behind `giskard.Model(model_predict, model_type="text_generation", ...)`; emits HTML report. Use when the user needs adversarial / red-team coverage on top of functional eval suites.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13 stars(GitHub 13 + cccskills 0)

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (2)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB
  • .tessl-plugin/plugin.json618 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

giskard-llm

Overview

Distinct from functional eval frameworks (Promptfoo, DeepEval, Ragas), Giskard's value (per gk-gh) is adversarial test generation - auto-generates inputs designed to break LLMs along documented vulnerability dimensions, then reports findings in a triageable HTML report.

Important version note (2026-05-06): per gk-gh, "Giskard v2 is no longer actively maintained. The current v3 focus is on giskard-checks for evaluations, while vulnerability scanning and RAG evaluation still rely on Giskard v2." This skill targets v2 LLM scanning; pin >2,<3 per the install command.

When to use

  • The team needs a red-team / adversarial pass before shipping an LLM feature.
  • Functional evals (Promptfoo / DeepEval / Ragas) pass but the team wants to surface vulnerabilities beyond the test corpus.
  • Compliance-driven assurance needs reportable evidence of hallucination / harmful-content / prompt-injection coverage.
  • Product owners need an HTML report (not raw test output) to triage and sign off.

Step 1 - Install

Per gk-gh (v2-pinned):

pip install "giskard[llm]>2,<3"

The [llm] extra pulls in the LLM scan dependencies.

Step 2 - Wrap your model

Per gk-gh (verbatim quickstart):

import giskard
import pandas as pd

def model_predict(df: pd.DataFrame):
    """The function takes a DataFrame and must return a list of outputs (one per row)."""
    return [my_llm_chain.run({"query": question}) for question in df["question"]]

giskard_model = giskard.Model(
    model=model_predict,
    model_type="text_generation",
    name="My LLM Application",
    description="A question answering assistant",
    feature_names=["question"],
)

The description field steers Giskard's adversarial generator - make it specific (e.g., "A question answering assistant for medical guidance" vs the generic "A QA assistant"). Better description ⇒ better-targeted adversarial inputs.

Step 3 - Run the scan

scan_results = giskard.scan(giskard_model)
display(scan_results)

(Per gk-gh.)

In a Jupyter notebook this renders the report inline. To export:

scan_results.to_html("giskard-report.html")

Step 4 - Vulnerability detector catalog

Per gk-gh the v2 LLM scan covers these detector categories:

DetectorWhat it tries to surface
hallucinationGenerated content not grounded in inputs / facts
harmful_contentToxic, dangerous, or harmful generation
prompt_injectionInputs that override system instructions
sensitive_information_disclosurePII / credentials / system prompt leakage
stereotypesDiscriminatory / stereotyped output by protected attribute
robustnessBrittleness to small input perturbations
basic_sycophancyAgreeing with falsehoods to please the user

Detector selection (subset run):

scan_results = giskard.scan(
    giskard_model,
    only=["hallucination", "prompt_injection"],
)

(Per the scan() API; consult docs.giskard.ai for the exact parameter list per Giskard release.)

Step 5 - Convert findings to test suites

After a scan surfaces issues, Giskard can synthesize tests for regression coverage:

test_suite = scan_results.generate_test_suite("My LLM Test Suite")
test_suite.run()

This produces deterministic regression tests from the failing adversarial prompts found by the scan - re-run on every PR to prevent regression on previously surfaced vulnerabilities.

Step 6 - CI integration

Giskard does not ship a first-party CI action; pattern:

python -m my_giskard_scan_script  # produces giskard-report.html

Then upload as a CI artifact:

- uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
  with: { name: giskard-report, path: giskard-report.html }

For PR-blocking gating, parse scan_results for severity and fail CI if any critical findings appear:

critical = [issue for issue in scan_results.issues if issue.level == "major"]
if critical:
    sys.exit(1)

Anti-patterns

Anti-patternWhy it failsFix
Generic description= fieldAdversarial generator produces off-target inputs; many false positivesSpecific description (Step 2)
Run scan once, never regenerate test suiteVulnerabilities resurface in new codeRegenerate test suite per release (Step 5)
Skip Step 5 - only rely on scansNo regression protection between scansAlways synthesize the test suite
Pin Giskard but not the judge-LLM providerJudge-model drift causes flakePin both in CI env

Limitations

  • v2 LLM scanning is in maintenance-only mode (per gk-gh); v3 is forming around giskard-checks. Track upstream before greenlighting new investment.
  • Adversarial generation is non-deterministic - use random seeds when available + pin Giskard version.
  • LLM-as-judge cost: scans invoke a judge model many times; budget for cost spikes when scanning new models.
  • Limited to text_generation and text_classification model types in v2; multi-modal scanning lives elsewhere in the Giskard ecosystem.

References

  • gk-gh - repository, install, quickstart, detector list
  • gk-docs - full documentation
  • promptfoo-evaluation, deepeval-evaluation, ragas-evaluation - functional eval sister tools (use Giskard for adversarial coverage on top)

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Builds a CI gate that fails the build on **new** WCAG / a11y violations introduced by a PR while grandfathering pre-existing violations on a per-rule / per-page baseline. Aggregates verdicts from axe-core / pa11y / Lighthouse a11y / WAVE / IBM Equal Access scans. Use when a project has accumulated a11y debt and a strict "zero violations" gate would block every PR - the ratchet pattern lets the team ship while preventing regressions.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

Workflow skill that builds an A/B-test validity checklist from an experiment proposal, walking the canonical design-correctness gates - pre-registered OEC/power/guardrails, randomization unit + SRM check, assignment integrity, telemetry, peeking discipline, novelty/primacy, post-experiment SRM re-check - into a per-experiment checklist + sign-off form. Use when launching, auditing, or governing an experiment. For pitfall mechanics (guardrails, peeking) see experiment-results-interpreter's references; to read an already-valid result use experiment-results-interpreter; for per-SDK harness tests use experiment-sdk-testing - this gates DESIGN, not SDK code.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

The single install-flow skill: the reference contract for the PWA install flow (installability gate fields, `beforeinstallprompt` handshake, per-platform paths - Android WebAPK / iOS Share menu / Firefox no-op - and the `display-mode` post-install signal, in references/install-flow-reference.md) plus the build-an-X workflow that emits the Add-to-Home-Screen suite. Walks the four-stage timeline, emitting one test per gate cell per [web.dev/articles/install-criteria][install-criteria], the deferred-prompt → `prompt()` → `userChoice` chain per [web.dev/articles/customize-install][customize-install], the iOS Safari manual-metadata branch (`apple-touch-icon`) per [web.dev/learn/pwa/installation][learn-pwa], and the post-install `(display-mode: standalone)` MQ assertion. Output: a Playwright spec with per-stage cells plus a coverage matrix. Use when a PWA's manifest, icons, or install handler change, when install conversion drops at an unknown stage, or when triaging a flaky install assertion.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

Build-an-X workflow that uses an LLM to map existing tests to spec sections - given a spec doc + the test suite, the LLM identifies which tests cover which sections, surfaces uncovered sections (gap), and recommends specific tests to add. Output is a coverage matrix per spec ID. Scope is mapping tests that already exist and naming the gaps, not authoring tests for new acceptance criteria. Use when a spec doc and a test suite both exist but nobody can say which requirements are actually covered - before a release sign-off, an audit, or a decision about where to spend the next round of test effort.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

Generates tests from natural-language specs (acceptance criteria, user stories, requirements) using an LLM, with confidence scoring per test case (LLM self-assessment plus heuristics: assertion quality, naming, completeness), batching uncertain cases for human review, and integration with the team's existing test framework. Use when the user asks to generate unit tests from acceptance criteria, convert user stories to test cases, automate test creation from requirements, or augment a spec-driven test suite with AI-generated stubs that are then curated before merge.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

Configures Allure Report (test-runner adapter install, `allure-results` directory wiring, `categories.json` for failure classification, `history-trend.json` retention via the copy-history-between-runs pattern), runs the Allure CLI to convert `allure-results` to a static HTML site, and uploads the report as a CI artifact. Use when the team needs richer test reporting than JUnit XML - step-level attachments, per-test history, retry tracking, and severity / epic / feature labeling across framework-agnostic adapters (pytest, Jest, JUnit, TestNG, NUnit, Mocha). As a rich static HTML report generator, it is the open-source alternative to the sunset ExtentReports (JVM/.NET per-test HTML narrative); for hosted cross-run flakiness analytics rather than a static per-run report use currents-integration.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

testland/qa13Updated Oct 20, 2026

See all skills by testland

Report a problem with this skill