Contact

What to include for faster support

To help us resolve issues quickly, include as much context as possible in your first message. Useful details include the page URL, skill name, expected behavior, actual behavior, and any screenshots or logs that show the problem. If the issue involves installation, include your client environment, operating system, and the exact command or configuration step where failure appears. Clear context reduces back-and-forth and lets us move directly to verification.

For listing corrections, please share a source link that confirms the requested change. We prioritize updates that improve factual accuracy, including maintainers, repository ownership, documentation location, pricing references, and deprecation notices. If a project has moved or changed branding, linking the official announcement helps our editorial team publish a correct update on the first pass.

Security disclosure process

If you discovered a potential security issue related to a listed skill, mark your email subject with Security Report so we can triage it immediately. Include reproducible steps, affected version details, risk impact, and any temporary mitigations you already validated. We review submissions responsibly and avoid public speculation before evidence is confirmed. Responsible disclosure protects users and keeps remediation focused.

We may request additional technical details during investigation. When sharing proof-of-concept material, remove private credentials and personal data before sending. If your report affects multiple ecosystems or dependency chains, we coordinate messaging to reduce confusion and help maintainers patch efficiently. Our priority is practical risk reduction, not sensational reporting.

Partnerships and editorial collaboration

Agent Skills Hub collaborates with open source maintainers, platform teams, and security researchers who want better documentation and safer adoption pathways. If you are proposing a partnership, include your project scope, target audience, and the specific outcome you want from collaboration. We prefer partnerships that deliver clear educational value to developers, such as migration guides, implementation examples, or transparent risk notes.

We do not guarantee paid placement in rankings, and sponsorship does not override editorial standards. This policy preserves trust for readers and supports long-term quality for advertisers. When visitors know recommendations are evidence driven, engagement quality improves across the entire ecosystem.

How triage and escalation works

Incoming requests are routed by impact and verification cost. Security reports and high-risk correction requests are triaged first, especially when the issue can affect active deployments or expose secrets. Standard metadata corrections and partnership questions follow in regular editorial queues. If a request requires cross-page updates, we create a scoped change set and verify linked references before publishing, so one fix does not introduce inconsistency elsewhere.

For urgent reports, adding a clear severity summary in the subject line helps us escalate quickly. Useful labels include Critical, High, Medium, or Informational with one sentence on expected impact. This small structure improves response quality because reviewers can align on urgency before implementation details are debated. Evidence-first escalation keeps remediation fast while reducing false alarms.

If your team operates in a regulated environment, mention compliance constraints up front. We can prioritize responses that require audit-ready wording, explicit control mapping, or stricter documentation needs. Clarifying those constraints early helps us provide guidance you can apply directly instead of generic recommendations that need heavy rework.