SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC consolidate

Consolidate and respond to external feedback on PRs/issues. Topics — pr (workflow entrypoint + skip conditions), collect (gather AI reviews + superpowers load), internal (Internal Code Review fallback + UI capture), classify (dual-label Type|Severity + diff scope check), decide (user decision: findings + Formal Review), post (Summary + Formal Review + status + deferred), next (post-summary next-action ask). Use when: "review consolidate", "PR review", "AI review", "CodeRabbit review", "Copilot review", "review check", "review summary", "merge ready", "internal review", "code-reviewer", "inline review", "line-level comment", "PR line review".

ClawHub Agent Skills author: es6kr v0.8.0 MIT-0 20 files · 8 scripts body ≈ 1 873 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Consolidate and respond to external feedback on PRs/issues.

As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

ProcedureGitHubSoftware developmentWriting and documentstype 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
91/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
94
Quality 40%
86
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
56/100
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

What is at stake

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

Broad scope 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 skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.

For the author

Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.

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 · 2

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 2
    • medium Broad scope meta-broad-allowed-tools SKILL.md:1
      Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bash
      allowed-tools: Agent AskUserQuestion Bash Edit Glob Grep Read Write
    • low Concealment en-hide-from-user pr.md:151
      Instruction to hide actions from the user (negated — the text forbids it)
      Do not silently run the Internal Review + Summary on any axis hit. The bot reviewer matrix (CodeRabbit/Copilot, Step 2.4) is a **separate** check — this gate is specifically about **humans and foreign
      negated

    Files scanned: 20. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "depends-on"

    Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100

    • 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
    • 30Running it twice. 1 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100Steps. 18 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1873 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)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • -32 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 13 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 649: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 9 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 18 items
    • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This is a powerful PR-review automation skill that mostly matches its stated purpose, but it needs Review because it can mutate GitHub PRs, install plugins, use GitHub tokens, and run review work on untrusted PR branches without clear sandboxing.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · 9 Oct 2026