BF superclaw
14 production-tested agent workflow skills for disciplined, high-quality AI coding and task execution. Covers TDD, debugging, code review, planning, brainstorming, verification, subagent dispatch, and more. Built by operators who run agents in production daily.
As a process F 34/100 · Will not run — weak spots: steps, result and completion, when it triggers
ProcedureSoftware developmentAI and agentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
How to improve
- 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 · 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
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
Process rating: all ten parameters 34/100
- 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
- 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
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (superclaw) differs from the folder (superclaw-skills)
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 379 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
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)
- +3No numbered steps or checklist
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 261: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 4 headings
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.
External checks
ClawHub: suspicious
This is a real coding-workflow skill bundle, but it needs Review because it can broadly steer the agent, run project code, change git state, expose a local browser helper, and persist user interaction data without enough scoping or consent.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026