SKILLEMALL.ai

AC resolve-beagle

Use as the follow-up to brainstorm-beagle when a spec has an Open Questions section (or quietly carries latent gaps) that need closing before planning or implementation can begin. Triggers on: "resolve the open questions", "close the gaps in this spec", "research the open items", "finalize my spec", "make this spec implementation-ready", "answer the TBDs". Also triggers whenever the user points at a brainstorm-beagle spec and asks for research, proposals, or answers to unresolved items. Orchestrates parallel research subagents when available (falls back to inline sequential research otherwise), proposes answers one at a time for user approval, then rewrites the spec in place so it arrives at planning with no known gaps. Does NOT write code, design implementation, or create plans — it only produces a complete spec.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Kevin Anderson v1.0.3 MIT-0 3 files body ≈ 2 896 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 3 d ago

As a process C 63/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

GeneratorInfrastructureSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
85
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
63/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

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: 3. 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 63/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 19 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, git) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 100Steps. 37 steps
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Failures and branches. 6 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2896 tokens
    • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low The response is described with custom markup (5 tags): a typed call is more reliable

    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

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Description length 825: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 6 example trigger phrases
    • +4Structure: 13 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 37 items
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

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

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    The supplied evidence shows clean scanner telemetry and no artifact-backed signs of hidden behavior, unsafe access, or malicious intent.
    LLM: benign (medium) · VirusTotal: · 25 Jun 2026