SKILLEMALL.ai

BF python-pep-authoring

Draft, review, edit, or prepare Python Enhancement Proposals using the official python/peps repository rules. Use when working on PEP text, PEP metadata headers, PEP process/status decisions, reStructuredText PEP formatting, python/peps pull requests, or validation with check-peps.py, pre-commit, and local rendering.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Mike Zhaoqyu v0.1.0 MIT-0 2 files body ≈ 1 099 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 36 h ago

Draft, review, edit, or prepare Python Enhancement Proposals using the official python/peps repository rules.

As a process F 37/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: references/process-and-policy.md, references/header-and-rst-rules.md, references/repo-validation.md

AnalyzerGitHubSoftware 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
F
37/100
Will not run
References files that are not bundled: references/process-and-policy.md, references/header-and-rst-rules.md, references/repo-validation.md
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. 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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

Against the Agent Skills spec

  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/process-and-policy.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/header-and-rst-rules.md
  • warning missing-ref reference to a missing file: references/repo-validation.md

Process rating: all ten parameters 37/100

Will not run. References files that are not bundled: references/process-and-policy.md, references/header-and-rst-rules.md, references/repo-validation.md
  • 0Tools and files. 3 referenced file(s) missing: references/process-and-policy.md, references/header-and-rst-rules.md, references/repo-validation.md
  • 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. 7 mutating operations with no state check
  • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (python-pep-authoring) differs from the folder (python-pep-authoring-skill)
  • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 100Steps. 37 steps
  • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1099 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
  • +1No license
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 318: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 6 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 37 items
  • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)

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

External checks

ClawHub: clean
This is a straightforward Python PEP writing helper with no executable code, hidden persistence, credential handling, or unrelated data access.
LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 30 Jun 2026