SKILLEMALL.ai

AC novelforge

通用小说创作与叙事引擎系统。面向短篇、中篇与长篇连载等各类小说,通过故事筑基 SOP 驱动题材对齐、规模承载力评估、总纲与世界观立项;通过自动化流水线驱动原生 Markdown Wiki 构建、蓝图校验、上下文编译、正文起草、双独立审查与事实结算;支持从小说或文章语料中两阶段提炼与构建自定义叙事引擎。当用户输入包括「新书立项」「故事筑基」「设计世界观」「规划总纲」「规模评估」「题材对齐」「写小说」「写下一章」「写第X章」「改写」「补充伏笔/钩子」「规划大纲」「检查质量」「章节结算」「继续流水线」「暂停写作」,或要求「参考某小说/文章提炼引擎」「构建叙事引擎」等任意小说创作与引擎构建任务时触发。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: fize v1.0.0 MIT-0 80 files body ≈ 642 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 31 h ago

通用小说创作与叙事引擎系统。面向短篇、中篇与长篇连载等各类小说,通过故事筑基 SOP 驱动题材对齐、规模承载力评估、总纲与世界观立项;通过自动化流水线驱动原生 Markdown Wiki…

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

ProcedureAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
90/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
74
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

  1. Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
For the model run — optional
  • 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: 70. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")

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
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
  • 100Steps. 13 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 642 tokens
  • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
  • low The response is described with custom markup (4 tags): a typed call is more reliable
  • medium 7 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"
  • low No test case covers injection arriving through data

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
  • -33 of 5 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 300: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 7 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 13 items
  • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (12 of 31)
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This is a coherent novel-writing skill, but it needs Review because some local file tools are under-scoped and can modify, read, or delete outside the intended project boundary.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 16 Sept 2026