BF voice-interview-simulator
进行中文求职语音模拟面试。适用于用户想围绕目标岗位进行多轮中文面试练习，并通过 ASR 识别回答、由 LLM 决定追问或换题、由 TTS 播报面试官问题，最终输出结构化评估报告、改进建议和示例优化回答的场景。支持 `target_role`、`interviewer_style`、`min_rounds`、`max_round_limit` 等配置；默认用于通用中文岗位面试，不依赖情绪识别、视频处理或其他额外音频算法。
As a process F 31/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: /mnt/cache/liudelong/cws/code6/openclaw-skill/review_simulate/.env.example
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 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".
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.
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Exfiltration
net-redirectable-api-keyscripts/run_interview.py:83Helper sends the API key to a host configured by an environment variable — the key can be redirected to another serverAPI key + configurable base URL from environment
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") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: /mnt/cache/liudelong/cws/code6/openclaw-skill/review_simulate/.env.example
Process rating: all ten parameters 31/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: /mnt/cache/liudelong/cws/code6/openclaw-skill/review_simulate/.env.example
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (voice-interview-simulator) differs from the folder (review-simulate)
- 100Steps. 104 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 788 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 211: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 11 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 104 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (2 of 2)
- +3All 1 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 73.