SKILLEMALL.ai

AC docs-pdf

Use this skill whenever the user wants to do anything with PDF files. Triggers include: reading or extracting text/tables from PDFs, combining or merging multiple PDFs into one, splitting PDFs apart, rotating pages, adding watermarks, creating new PDFs from scratch, filling PDF forms, encrypting or password-protecting PDFs, extracting images from PDFs, OCR on scanned PDFs, compressing/optimizing PDFs, viewing PDF info/metadata, converting images to PDF, converting PDF to images, comparing two PDFs, reordering pages, repairing corrupted PDFs, and listing fonts. Also trigger when the user uploads a .pdf file and asks you to do something with it, or when they mention "PDF" in any context involving file creation, editing, or data extraction — even if they don't say "PDF skill" explicitly.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: echodjx v1.0.3 MIT-0 25 files body ≈ 2 848 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 3 d ago

As a process C 53/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

GeneratorPDFInfrastructureWriting and documentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
89
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
53/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

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 · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 25. 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 53/100

    • 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
    • 30Running it twice. 8 mutating operations with no state check
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 100Steps. 16 steps
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2848 tokens
    • 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
    • -227 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 795: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 20 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 16 items
    • +4Has examples (11 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
    • +3All 18 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This appears to be a legitimate PDF toolkit, but it needs review because it documents privileged setup, broad file-changing workflows, password removal, and a misleading form-flattening option.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026