SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BF blog-mini-ljt

管理博客系统全部 API（8 模块 28 端点：文章/评论/标签/留言/心情/用户/文件/后台）。 无认证公开 API，base_url 内置默认地址无配置即可用。供 AI Agent 完成博客内容全流程管理。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: yangaiwu v1.0.0 MIT-0 7 files body ≈ 2 580 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 3 d ago

管理博客系统全部 API（8 模块 28 端点：文章/评论/标签/留言/心情/用户/文件/后台）。 无认证公开 API，baseurl 内置默认地址无配置即可用。供 AI Agent 完成博客内容全流程管理。

As a process F 45/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/api-reference.md, references/schemas.md, templates/test-vars.json

IntegrationInfrastructureAI and agentstype 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
83/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
58
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
F
45/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: references/api-reference.md, references/schemas.md, templates/test-vars.json
Tools and files w 18
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.
  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: 7. 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: references/api-reference.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/schemas.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: templates/test-vars.json
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "triggers"
  • note frontmatter-key unknown frontmatter key "tools"

Process rating: all ten parameters 45/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/api-reference.md, references/schemas.md, templates/test-vars.json
  • 0Tools and files. 3 referenced file(s) missing: references/api-reference.md, references/schemas.md, templates/test-vars.json
  • 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
  • 30Running it twice. 24 mutating operations with no state check
  • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
  • 100Steps. 41 steps
  • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2580 tokens
  • low 11 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

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 105: 120–800 characters recommended
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +4Structure: 36 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 41 items
  • +3Output format is stated explicitly
  • +4Has examples (20 code blocks)

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 58.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
This skill is a real blog-management wrapper, but it can modify or delete live remote blog data and upload local files with weak scoping and no clear confirmation safeguards.
LLM: suspicious (high) · 24 Aug 2026