BC competitive_analysis
Poll competitive crawl triggers, aggregate the last 6 months of product, review, and QA data by category, produce structured analysis context and a report skeleton, upload outputs to OSS, then send a DingTalk summary. Use for database-driven scheduled competitor analysis in OpenClaw.
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, consistency, running it twice
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The instructions or scripts send data out: environment variables, keys, file contents, chat history. You may never notice, because the agent performs the upload as "part of the task".
If the upload is not needed for the task, remove it: catalogs flag such skills and delist them. If it is needed, name the destination explicitly, say what leaves the machine, and give the user a switch.
How to improve
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Exfiltration
net-redirectable-api-keyscripts/upload_oss.py:51Helper sends the API key to a host configured by an environment variable — the key can be redirected to another serverAPI key + configurable base URL from environment
Files scanned: 9. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
name-formatname should be kebab-case (lowercase letters, digits, hyphens)
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (competitive_analysis) differs from the folder (bbt-competitive-analysis)
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, python) that frontmatter does not declare
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Steps. 52 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 771 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
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- -31 of 4 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
- +3Description length 284: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 9 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 52 items
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.