SKILLEMALL.ai

AC file-writer

Safely write or append text content to files ONLY in /home/alfred/.openclaw/workspace/scratch. Creates backups before overwriting ({filename}.bak, .bak.1, etc.). Creates subdirectories if needed. Triggers on queries like "update the script with the new feature" (infers update), "write that information to a file in your scratch area" (prompts for details), "write [content] to [rel_path]", "append [content] to [rel_path]". Restrict to relative paths; reject absolutes, ../ escapes, binary content, or non-text extensions. NOT for executing code, deleting, or writing outside scratch.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Nagilem v1.0.0 MIT-0 4 files · 1 script body ≈ 598 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 3 d ago

As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, consistency

GeneratorAI and agentsInfrastructureSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
80
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
58/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
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: 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")

Process rating: all ten parameters 58/100

  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 30Running it twice. 11 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (file-writer) differs from the folder (scratch-file-writer)
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 85Steps. 28 steps, 1 vague phrases
  • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
  • 100Failures and branches. 2 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 598 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

  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +4No input/output examples
  • -4Absolute local paths (C:\Users, /home/…): not portable
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +5Description quotes 4 example trigger phrases
  • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
  • +3Description length 585: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 6 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 28 items
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
  • +3All 1 scripts are documented

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This scratch file writer is not clearly malicious, but it asks the agent to use shell commands for file operations in a way that is broader than its safe-file-writing promise.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026