SKILLEMALL.ai
RU Sign in

AC skill-soup-dev

Autonomous skill generation agent that picks up community ideas, uses evolved builder tools to produce Agent Skills, and publishes them back to the Skill Soup ecosystem. Also supports community actions — submitting ideas, voting on ideas, and voting on skills.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Phil Bennett v0.5.0 4 files body ≈ 4 113 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 2 d ago

As a process C 55/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, consistency

GeneratorAI and agentsInfrastructuretype 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
90/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
75
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
55/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Consistency w 8
40
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: 4. 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 55/100

  • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
  • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
  • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (skill-soup-dev) differs from the folder (skill-soup)
  • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
  • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
  • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4113 tokens
  • 100Steps. 76 steps
  • 100Failures and branches. 19 branches, has a failure section
  • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
  • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
  • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
  • low 14 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
  • high The skill tells the model to perform an irreversible action with no human approval
  • low The response is described with custom markup (7 tags): a typed call is more reliable

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
  • -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
  • +2Single-language instructions
  • +3Description length 260: enough signal without eating the budget
  • +4Structure: 24 headings
  • +3Step-by-step instructions: 76 items
  • +4Has examples (18 code blocks)
  • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)
  • +1License stated

Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 75.

External checks

ClawHub: suspicious
The skill is transparent about autonomous skill generation, but it gives an agent broad authority to follow externally synced instructions and publish public GitHub-backed content with weak approval boundaries.
LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: suspicious · 28 May 2026