SKILLEMALL.ai

AF gitcode-issue-workflow

End-to-end GitCode issue workflow covering issue pickup, analysis, code modification, and PR submission. Use when user asks to handle/fix/resolve a GitCode issue, or when working on issue-driven development for GitCode repositories. Triggers on phrases like "接取 issue", "处理 issue", "修复 issue", "fix issue", "handle issue", "resolve issue", "提交 PR", "create PR for issue". Requires gitcode CLI (GitCode CLI) and git. NOT for code review (use code-review skill), issue triage without code changes, or non-GitCode platforms.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: hummel mao v1.0.2 MIT-0 3 files body ≈ 3 532 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 3 d ago

As a process F 63/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: [module]

AnalyzerSoftware developmenttype 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
F
63/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: [module]
Tools and files w 18
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Running it twice w 4
30
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: [module]

Process rating: all ten parameters 63/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: [module]
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: [module]
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 30Running it twice. 19 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
  • 85Steps. 78 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
  • 100Failures and branches. 10 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3532 tokens
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low The response is described with custom markup (7 tags): a typed call is more reliable

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

  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • -212 emoji in the instructions: noise for the model
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
  • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
  • +3Description length 521: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 21 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 78 items
  • +4Has examples (24 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

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

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is a coherent GitCode issue-to-PR workflow, but it gives unsafe instructions for handling access tokens that could expose repository credentials.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 28 May 2026