SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD wecom-doc

文档与智能表格操作。当用户提到企业微信文档、创建文档、编辑文档、新建文档、写文档、智能表格时激活。支持文档创建/写入和智能表格的创建及子表/字段/记录写入。注意：所有文档创建和编辑请求都应使用此 skill，不要尝试用其他方式处理文档操作。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: wecom v1.0.1 MIT-0 3 files body ≈ 2 484 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process D 43/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

ReferenceInfrastructuretype 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
86/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
98
Quality 40%
68
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
43/100
Unfinished process
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

The same skill appears in 1 more place: ClawHub

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
  • 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 Secrets in code secret-high-entropy-token references/doc-api.md:21
    High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)
    → doc_id = w3_A…HbQ
  • low Secrets in code secret-high-entropy-token references/doc-api.md:33
    High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential)
    → doc_id = s3_A…v05

Files scanned: 3. 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 43/100

  • 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
  • 30Running it twice. 7 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (node) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 100Steps. 33 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2484 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

  • +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
  • -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 120: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 31 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 33 items
  • +4Has examples (13 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 68.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This skill performs real WeCom document and smart-table writes, but it is scoped broadly enough that ordinary document requests could be routed to WeCom and full-document overwrites may occur without a clear confirmation step.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026