SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AB skill-factory

Create, evaluate, improve, benchmark, and publish OpenClaw skills. Use when building a new skill from scratch, iterating on an existing skill, running evals to measure quality, comparing skill versions, or analyzing patterns across installed skills to synthesize new ones. Triggers on: 'create a skill', 'build a skill', 'make a skill', 'eval this skill', 'improve this skill', 'benchmark skill versions', 'analyze skill patterns', 'synthesize skill from patterns', 'package skill', 'publish skill'.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: jeremysommerfeld8910-cpu v1.0.0 11 files body ≈ 2 103 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

Create, evaluate, improve, benchmark, and publish OpenClaw skills.

As a process B 65/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, running it twice

AnalyzerData and analyticsAI and agentstype 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
A
95/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
88
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
65/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Running it twice w 4
30
Failures and branches w 10
50
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: 8. 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

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 30Running it twice. 10 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Steps. 41 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2103 tokens
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
    • low The response is described with custom markup (6 tags): a typed call is more reliable
    • medium 7 test cases, all positive: not one "should refuse" or "should ask first"
    • low No test case covers injection arriving through data

    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)
    • -31 of 4 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 499: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 25 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 41 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (15 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 88.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This skill is coherently aimed at building and publishing other skills, but it uses broad local scans and unsafe helper-script and packaging patterns that could leak files or carry untrusted instructions into future skill work.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: suspicious · 10 Sept 2026