SKILLEMALL.ai

BF github-skill-publisher

把本地 Agent / Skill / 工具包标准化发布到 GitHub 公开仓库。当用户要把本地文件转成开源 skill 上传时触发。 完整工作流:脱敏检查 → 文件结构对齐 github-project-radar 标准 → 建空仓 → 逐文件推送 → 补 topics / description / release。封装了今天踩过的所有坑(auto_init README 覆盖、URL 转码、 私改公开、topic 清理)。一次成功不再返工。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Shi Yan (施言) v1.0.0 MIT-0 6 files body ≈ 1 654 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 2 d ago

把本地 Agent / Skill / 工具包标准化发布到 GitHub 公开仓库。当用户要把本地文件转成开源 skill 上传时触发。 完整工作流:脱敏检查 → 文件结构对齐 github-project-radar 标准 → 建空仓 → 逐文件推送 → 补 topics / description /…

As a process F 35/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: path

ProcedureGitHubAI and agentsWriting and documentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
86/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
65
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
35/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: path
Tools and files w 18
0
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
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: 6. 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")
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: path
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "agent_created"

Process rating: all ten parameters 35/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: path
  • 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: path
  • 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
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 8 mutating operations with no state check
  • 100Steps. 23 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1654 tokens
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress

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
  • -41 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 226: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 12 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 23 items
  • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
  • +3All 1 scripts are documented
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 65.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This GitHub-publishing skill is mostly coherent, but it deserves review because it handles GitHub write tokens, publishes local files publicly, has a privacy-scan gap, and writes activity into memory.
LLM: suspicious (high) · 9 Aug 2026