SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD boeingchoco-polymarket-ai-divergence

Find markets where Simmer's AI consensus diverges from the real market price, then trade on the mispriced side using calibration-shrunk Kelly sizing. Scans for divergence, applies AI-overconfidence shrinkage, liquidity / spread / time-to-resolution safeguards, and executes trades on zero-fee markets with sufficient surviving edge.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: boeingchoco v2.6.1 MIT-0 8 files body ≈ 3 686 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 2 d ago

Find markets where Simmer's AI consensus diverges from the real market price, then trade on the mispriced side using calibration-shrunk Kelly sizing.

As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

IntegrationSoftware developmentData and analyticsAI 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
79/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
85
Quality 40%
69
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
49/100
Unfinished process
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

What is at stake

Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.

Exfiltration medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

The instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".

For the author

If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.

Risky intent medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

The purpose itself is risky: wallets, browser password stores, offensive security. Even an honest implementation gives the agent access to things that cost money.

For the author

Explain in the description why the access is needed and how it is limited; add tests that show refusals on dangerous requests.

How to improve

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
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 · 3

✓ No critical or high findings

Medium and low: 3
  • medium Exfiltration net-redirectable-api-key scripts/status.py:18
    Helper sends the API key to a host configured by an environment variable — the key can be redirected to another server
    API key + configurable base URL from environment
  • medium Risky intent intent-wallet-secrets skill-card.md:22
    Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target
    Risk: A wallet private key can control funds when external-wallet self-custody trading is used. <br>
  • medium Risky intent intent-wallet-secrets SKILL.md:108
    Handles crypto-wallet secrets (seed / mnemonic / private key) — a classic stealer target
    3. **Ask for wallet private key** (only for external-wallet self-custody trading)

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

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")

Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100

  • 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
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web, python) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 85Steps. 60 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3686 tokens
  • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
  • low 11 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)
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • -31 of 1 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 332: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 16 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 60 items
  • +4Has examples (4 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This is a real-money trading skill with mostly coherent behavior, but it needs Review because it requests sensitive wallet authority and performs an automatic portfolio action that is not clearly disclosed or gated.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 28 May 2026