AB expert-mode
AI expert panel, specialist advisor, technical review, thoughtful critique, and decision-support system for OpenClaw projects. Use when the user says "activating expert mode", "quick expert mode", or "deep expert mode", or wants virtual experts, expert archetypes/personas, AI specialists, domain advisors, consultants, reviewers, second opinions, strategic analysis, technical analysis, architecture review, design review, implementation review, risk audit, red-team critique, prompt engineering advice, customer experience advice, client relationship guidance, top-notch expert support, or project planning support. Supports quick/standard/deep/custom-length responses, project-local expert rosters, reusable dossiers, custom requested experts, prominent expert biographic anchors, client-relationship stance, and minimal context loading.
As a process B 68/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, consistency, running it twice
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:20Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)Use Expert Mode when you want an AI expert panel, virtual advisory board, custom expert, expert persona, domain specialist, thoughtful advisor, technical reviewer, critique partner, red team reviewer,
-
low Risky intent
intent-offensive-securitySKILL.md:33Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)- red team reviewer / risk reviewer / safety audit
Files scanned: 16. 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 68/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 16 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (expert-mode) differs from the folder (expert-mode-archetypes)
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4067 tokens
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 80 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 4 branches, has a failure section
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 17 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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 840: 120–800 characters recommended
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 3 example trigger phrases
- +4Structure: 18 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 80 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (5 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (9 of 12)
- +3All 2 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 96.