SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC content-analytics

内容效果分析(v25.0合并content-closed-loop)，计算播放/完播/互动/转化指标，生成S/A/B/C评级和优化建议+6步闭环(publish→recommend→feedback→analyze→optimize→learn)。触发词：内容分析/播放数据/完播率/互动统计/内容评级/闭环/CP-07 不触发：内容发布/内容模板/趋势发现

ClawHub Agent Skills author: 天轰穿 v1.0.2 MIT-0 10 files body ≈ 1 183 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

As a process C 51/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerInfrastructureData and analyticstype 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
88/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
69
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
51/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
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.
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: 10. 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 "tools"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "dependencies"

Process rating: all ten parameters 51/100

  • 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
  • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
  • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
  • 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
  • 100Steps. 45 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1183 tokens

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
  • -43 reference files, but SKILL.md never points to them: the model will not open them
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 179: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 14 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 45 items
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)
  • +3All 2 scripts are documented

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 69.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is mostly coherent with content analytics, but it also has broad database-write, cross-tenant sync, external tool, and persistent learning behavior that should be reviewed before installation.
LLM: suspicious (high) · 15 Aug 2026