SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC test-coverage-report

Analyze test coverage gaps by comparing test files against source modules to identify untested code paths and critical functions.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: jk625x v1.0.4 MIT-0 4 files body ≈ 257 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 28 h ago

Analyze test coverage gaps by comparing test files against source modules to identify untested code paths and critical functions.

As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

AnalyzerData and analyticstype 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
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
70
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
54/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

  1. 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: 4. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "displayName"

Process rating: all ten parameters 54/100

  • 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
  • 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (test-coverage-report) differs from the folder (ljkhlk)
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
  • 100Steps. 9 steps
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 257 tokens

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)
  • +4No input/output examples
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 129: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 4 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 9 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly

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

External checks

ClawHub: clean
This skill only guides an agent to read project code and report test coverage gaps, with no evidence of hidden, destructive, credential, persistence, or network behavior.
LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 4 Jun 2026