SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BB flutter-updater

Keep Flutter/Dart projects automatically up-to-date. Detects new Flutter/Dart SDK releases, updates pubspec.yaml dependencies with safe breaking-change handling (reads changelogs, auto-fixes code, rolls back per-package if unfixable), runs dart fix, and performs full QA (flutter analyze → flutter test → flutter build). Use when asked to "update flutter", "update dependencies", "upgrade packages", or "keep flutter up to date". Flags: --sdk-only, --deps-only, --qa-only.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: JaekyungYou v1.0.0 MIT-0 4 files body ≈ 3 158 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 9 d ago

Keep Flutter/Dart projects automatically up-to-date.

As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

IntegrationData and analyticsSoftware developmenttype 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
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
95
Quality 40%
89
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
65/100
Nearly there
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

What is at stake

Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.

Broad scope medium severity

Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.

If you install

The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.

For the author

Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.

How to improve

    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 · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • medium Broad scope meta-broad-allowed-tools SKILL.md:1
      Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bash
      allowed-tools: Bash Read Write Edit Grep Glob WebFetch AskUserQuestion

    Files scanned: 4. 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 65/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
    • 100Steps. 32 steps
    • 100Failures and branches. 7 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3158 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
    • low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low The response is described with custom markup (14 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

    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 472: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 24 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 32 items
    • +4Has examples (24 code blocks)

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

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This Flutter updater mostly matches its stated purpose, but it needs review because it automatically runs unaudited helper programs found through PATH before user confirmation and can make broad project changes.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 16 Sept 2026