SKILLEMALL.ai

BC ontology-clawra

ontology-clawra v5.0 - Local Ontology Reasoning Engine A local structured reasoning engine with confidence management and automatic learning. Reads user workspace memory files for context. No cross-skill scheduling or network communication. Core Capabilities: - Ontology knowledge graph storage and reasoning - Confidence calculation and meta-cognition - Local memory search and rule learning File Access: Read/write only ~/.openclaw/skills/ontology-clawra/memory/ for ontology files; Read only ~/.openclaw/workspace/memory/*.md for user context. No cross-skill scheduling, no automatic network requests.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: wu-xiaochen v5.1.0 MIT-0 11 files body ≈ 920 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 8 h ago

ontology-clawra v5.0 - Local Ontology Reasoning Engine A local structured reasoning engine with confidence management and automatic learning. Reads user…

As a process C 54/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches

ProcedureAI and agentsSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
B
89/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
72
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
54/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
When it triggers w 12
20
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: 11. 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 54/100

  • 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. 3 mutating operations with no state check
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (git) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 100Steps. 13 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 920 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)
  • -37 of 8 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 607: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 13 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 13 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (2 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 72.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is plausibly a local ontology reasoning tool, but inconsistent file-path handling and mixed/inactive network-related code (plus mentions of GitHub pushes) create ambiguity about exactly where it will read/write and whether network actions could be enabled later.
LLM: suspicious (medium) · VirusTotal: benign · 9 Apr 2026