BC voice-assistant
Real-time voice assistant for OpenClaw. Streams mic audio through configurable STT (Deepgram or ElevenLabs) into your OpenClaw agent, then speaks the response via configurable TTS (Deepgram Aura or ElevenLabs). Sub-2s time-to-first-audio with full streaming at every stage.
As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The text contains phrases like "ignore previous instructions" or "you are now…". That is an attempt to hijack the agent: it may break your rules, the system limits or company policy.
An honest skill does not need them: state the role and the rules directly without overriding other instructions. Otherwise catalog scanners and corporate filters will block the listing.
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- 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 Instruction override
en-fake-system-promptSKILL.md:81Fake system prompt injected into content (code comment)VOICE_SYSTEM_PROMPT="" # Optional system prompt override
comment -
low Exfiltration
read-dotenvSKILL.md:37Reads a .env filecp .env.example .env
-
low Exfiltration
read-dotenvSKILL.md:113Reads a .env file→ OpenClaw runs: cd {baseDir} && cp .env.example .env
Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 58/100
- 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
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 14 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1290 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
- 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)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- -31 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 273: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 14 items
- +4Has examples (4 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 67.