SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC auditclaw-github

GitHub compliance evidence collection for auditclaw-grc. 9 read-only checks covering branch protection, secret scanning, 2FA, Dependabot, deploy keys, audit logs, webhooks, CODEOWNERS, and CI/CD security.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Nikhil Jathar v1.0.2 15 files body ≈ 943 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, running it twice

AnalyzerGitHubSecurityInfrastructuretype 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%
73
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
59/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
When it triggers w 12
20
Running it twice w 4
30
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: 15. 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 "homepage"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "source"

Process rating: all ten parameters 59/100

  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
  • 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (python) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
  • 100Steps. 25 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 943 tokens
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing

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)
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 204: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 12 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 25 items
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
  • +3All 1 scripts are documented

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 73.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This appears to be a legitimate read-only GitHub compliance evidence skill, but one reported check may create false compliance assurance and the local persistence of security metadata deserves review.
LLM: suspicious (medium) · VirusTotal: benign · 28 May 2026