BF update-advisor
OpenClaw update check and upgrade assistant. Triggers on phrases like "check for updates", "any new version", "is openclaw updated", "run the update", "confirm update", "upgrade openclaw". Two modes: (1) Check mode — analyze changelog, risk assessment, recommendation; (2) Execute mode — perform update with explicit, pre-update recovery watchdog protection (macOS launchd or Linux systemd).
As a process F 62/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: scripts/recovery-watchdog-launchd.template.plist
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill tells the agent to hide things from you: not to show errors, not to mention actions, to report differently from what was done. You lose the ability to see what the agent really did.
Transparency beats a smooth answer. If the goal is to hide technical noise, ask the agent to "summarise briefly", not to "not mention".
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- 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 · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Concealment
en-hide-from-userREADME.md:84Instruction to hide actions from the user (security demo / example)If OpenClaw was installed by a different OS user (e.g. via Homebrew under another account), running `openclaw update` as the current user may silently install a second copy instead of updating the ori
demo
Files scanned: 8. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/recovery-watchdog-launchd.template.plist
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/recovery-watchdog-launchd.template.plist
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 85Steps. 44 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Failures and branches. 13 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3399 tokens
- 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
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
- +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
- +5Description quotes 6 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 391: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 19 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 44 items
- +4Has examples (9 code blocks)
- +3All 5 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.