AC li_sentry_check
Multi-platform server inspection and health check skill. SSH into remote Linux servers using key-based authentication, run read-only inspection commands (CPU, memory, disk, network, services, security), and generate structured Markdown reports with anomaly highlighting. Use when the user asks to inspect servers, run health checks, check system metrics, perform 巡检/巡查, gather system status, or generate inspection reports. Compatible with nanobot, OpenClaw, and Hermes agent.
As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches, consistency
How to improve
- 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: 18. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
name-formatname should be kebab-case (lowercase letters, digits, hyphens)
Process rating: all ten parameters 53/100
- 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
- 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (li_sentry_check) differs from the folder (li-sentry-check)
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Steps. 29 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1066 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 12 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)
- -212 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 476: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 16 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 83.