BF odsh-interop
ODSH Bridge cross-container collaboration protocol — how the OpenClaw agent routes tasks between itself and a DeepSeek Harness (DSH) execution layer by task weight and predicted token cost: task envelopes, bridge zones, notification channel rules, optional read-only SQLite audit ledger
ODSH Bridge cross-container collaboration protocol — how the OpenClaw agent routes tasks between itself and a DeepSeek Harness (DSH) execution layer by task…
As a process F 48/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: scripts/dsh-entrypoint.sh
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: ODSH Bridge cross-container collaboration protocol — how the OpenC… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value - warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/dsh-entrypoint.sh - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "author_email" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "maintainers" - note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "categories"
Process rating: all ten parameters 48/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/dsh-entrypoint.sh
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 30Running it twice. 9 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Steps. 39 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 1 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2698 tokens
- 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 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
- +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
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 286: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 20 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 39 items
- +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 54.