SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AF go-code-review

Reviews Go code for idiomatic patterns, error handling, concurrency safety, and common mistakes. Use when reviewing .go files, checking error handling, goroutine usage, or interface design. Covers generics (Go 1.18+), errors.Join and slog (Go 1.21+), and Go 1.22 loop variable semantics.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Kevin Anderson v2.3.1 MIT-0 6 files body ≈ 1 846 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process F 51/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md

AnalyzerSoftware developmentInfrastructuretype 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
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
85
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
51/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
Tools and files w 18
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
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: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

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

Process rating: all ten parameters 51/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 85Steps. 61 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1846 tokens
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • low 10 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)
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 287: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 20 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 61 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 85.

External checks

ClawHub: clean
This is a documentation-only Go code review skill whose instructions are aligned with reviewing Go source code and do not add executable behavior or hidden access.
LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026