SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

CF content-summary

智能内容总结和项目复盘工具

ClawHub Agent Skills author: nidhov01 v1.0.0 MIT-0 5 files · 2 scripts body ≈ 566 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 6 d ago

智能内容总结和项目复盘工具

As a process F 28/100 · No process to follow — References files that are not bundled: scripts/summary_review.py

ProcedureWriting and documentstype 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
C
82/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
54
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
28/100
No process to follow
References files that are not bundled: scripts/summary_review.py
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
When it triggers w 12
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.
  2. The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
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: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning description-short description under 40 chars: too little signal for triggering
  • warning description-no-when description does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when")
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: scripts/summary_review.py
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "requires"

Process rating: all ten parameters 28/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: scripts/summary_review.py
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/summary_review.py
  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 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
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (content-summary) differs from the folder (05)
  • 100Steps. 22 steps
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 566 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

  • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
  • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
  • +3Description length 13: 120–800 characters recommended
  • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +4Structure: 22 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 22 items
  • +4Has examples (6 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 54.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is a local summarization tool, but it keeps submitted content in a persistent searchable database and can export plaintext files without clear user controls.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 12 Sept 2026