SKILLEMALL.ai
RU Sign in

AB iterative-code-evolution

Systematically improve code through structured analysis-mutation-evaluation loops. Adapted from ALMA (Automated meta-Learning of Memory designs for Agentic systems). Use when iterating on code quality, optimizing implementations, debugging persistent issues, or evolving a design through multiple improvement cycles. Replaces ad-hoc "try and fix" with disciplined reflection, variant tracking, and principled selection of what to change next.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: @aaronjmars v1.0.0 3 files body ≈ 3 069 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 2 d ago

As a process B 71/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSoftware developmenttype 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
A
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
71/100
Nearly there
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
When it triggers w 12
70
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    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: 3. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    ✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec

    Process rating: all ten parameters 71/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 50 steps
    • 100Failures and branches. 5 branches, has a failure section
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3069 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
    • 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)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 442: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 19 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 50 items
    • +4Has examples (6 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    This is a disclosed developer workflow skill for iterative code improvement, with expected code edits, test execution, and local logging but no evidence of hidden or malicious behavior.
    LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: suspicious · 28 May 2026