SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD QClaw任务提交

通过 QClaw 向 WorkBuddy 提交需要复杂执行的任务。当用户想要： - 通过微信/对话将任务交给 WorkBuddy 执行 - "帮我生成/制作/分析/整理..." - 需要创建文档、PPT、Excel、报告 - 深度数据分析、多步骤操作 - 批量文件处理 - 定时自动化任务 - 明确说"交给 WorkBuddy"、"远程执行" - QClaw 做不到的事，WorkBuddy 来做 触发词：交给WorkBuddy、QClaw发任务、微信转WorkBuddy、远程执行、任务分发、WorkBuddy生成、WorkBuddy分析

ClawHub Agent Skills author: liuboacean v1.2.0 MIT-0 2 files body ≈ 418 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

ReferenceInfrastructureData 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
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
72
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
49/100
Unfinished process
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning name-format name should be kebab-case (lowercase letters, digits, hyphens)
  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")

Process rating: all ten parameters 49/100

  • 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 (QClaw任务提交) differs from the folder (qclaw-task-submitter)
  • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
  • 100Steps. 10 steps
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 418 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

  • +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 2 example trigger phrases
  • +3Description length 270: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 10 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
  • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This skill is a plausible WorkBuddy bridge, but it can hand broad local file, document, analysis, and automation tasks to an immediate executor without clear confirmation, scope limits, or cancellation guidance.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: suspicious · 28 May 2026