AB runbook-generator
Generate operational runbooks from project files. Scans Dockerfiles, docker-compose.yml, systemd units, Makefiles, package.json, and config files to produce step-by-step operational runbooks with start/stop/restart/deploy/rollback/troubleshoot procedures. Use when asked to create a runbook, generate ops docs, create operational documentation, build a deployment guide, document service procedures, or create an SRE runbook. Triggers on "create runbook", "ops documentation", "deployment guide", "operational docs", "SRE runbook", "service procedures", "how to deploy".
Generate operational runbooks from project files.
As a process B 71/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: consistency, running it twice, progress reporting
The same skill appears in 1 more place: ClawHub
How to improve
- 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 · 4
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 4
-
low Exfiltration
read-dotenvscripts/generate_runbook.py:482Reads a .env file (quoted — discussed, not commanded)lines.append("# Copy .env.example to .env and fill in values")quoted -
low Exfiltration
read-dotenvscripts/generate_runbook.py:483Reads a .env file (quoted — discussed, not commanded)lines.append("cp .env.example .env")quoted -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-privilegescripts/generate_runbook.py:577Privilege escalation / world-writable permissions (string literal in code, not executed)lines.append(f"sudo cp {s['path']} /etc/systemd/system/")code literal -
low Dangerous commands
cmd-background-processscripts/generate_runbook.py:579Starts a background / autostarted process (string literal in code, not executed)lines.append(f"sudo systemctl enable {unit_name}")code literal
Files scanned: 4. 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 71/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (runbook-generator) differs from the folder (ops-runbook-generator)
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 16 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 472 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 570: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 6 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 16 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 95.