SKILLEMALL.ai

AC llm-workflow-diagnoser

Use this skill whenever a user wants to evaluate whether an existing offline / reusable workflow is worth converting into an LLM-driven workflow. Triggers on phrases like "这个流程要不要交给大模型做", "我有个跑得很熟的脚本流程, 能不能用 LLM 改造", "我想把这套离线流程升级成 LLM 工作流", "判断一下现在流程合不合适交给大模型", "LLM 改造 ROI 诊断", "评估一下大模型介入的成本收益". Always trigger when the user describes a reusable workflow and wants a go / partial / no-go decision plus ROI reasoning, even if they don't ask for the words "diagnose" or "ROI" explicitly. Do not trigger for one-off prompts that are not a reusable workflow, and do not trigger for general writing / coding tasks.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Overlord v0.1.0 MIT-0 10 files body ≈ 977 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 2 d ago

Triggers on phrases like "这个流程要不要交给大模型做", "我有个跑得很熟的脚本流程, 能不能用 LLM 改造", "我想把这套离线流程升级成 LLM 工作流", "判断一下现在流程合不合适交给大模型", "LLM 改造 ROI 诊断", "评估一下大模型介入的成本收益".

As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
96/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
90
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
59/100
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
    • 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: 9. 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 59/100

    • 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
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 45 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 977 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • medium 3 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"

    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
    • +4No input/output examples
    • -222 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 610: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 15 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 45 items
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +3All 1 scripts are documented

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 90.

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    This skill is a structured conversational guide for deciding whether a reusable workflow is suitable for LLM automation, with no hidden privileged behavior found.
    LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 23 Jul 2026