SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC cfo-advisor

Financial leadership for startups and scaling companies. Financial modeling, unit economics, fundraising strategy, cash management, and board financial packages. Use when building financial models, analyzing unit economics, planning fundraising, managing cash runway, preparing board materials, or when user mentions CFO, burn rate, runway, fundraising, unit economics, LTV, CAC, term sheets, or financial strategy.

LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills Agent Skills author: LeoYeAI MIT 8 files body ≈ 1 626 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 2 d ago

Financial leadership for startups and scaling companies.

As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

AnalyzerData and analyticstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: OpenClaw Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
98/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
95
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
62/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: cfo-advisor (LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills)

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 8. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 31 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1626 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • low 13 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 415: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 14 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 31 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +3All 3 scripts are documented
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 95.