SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BF fix-llm-artifacts

Applies fixes from a prior review-llm-artifacts run, with safe/risky classification. Respects verify-llm-artifacts output when present to skip false positives.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Kevin Anderson v1.1.5 MIT-0 2 files body ≈ 2 895 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process F 46/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../review-llm-artifacts/SKILL.md, ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md

AnalyzerAI and agentstype 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
B
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
70
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
46/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: ../review-llm-artifacts/SKILL.md, ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../review-llm-artifacts/SKILL.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 46/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: ../review-llm-artifacts/SKILL.md, ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
  • 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: ../review-llm-artifacts/SKILL.md, ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 70Failures and branches. 10 branches
  • 85Steps. 38 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2895 tokens

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)
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 159: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 17 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 38 items
  • +4Has examples (18 code blocks)

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

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is mostly coherent, but it can automatically run whole-repository autofix tools that may change files beyond the review findings the user approved.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 1 Jun 2026