SKILLEMALL.ai

AB caring

Apply a caring quality review to any work product — draft, plan, code, report, analysis, or reply — before it ships. Use when the user asks to review, check, or improve something; when finalising a deliverable; or when you want to ensure work meets a genuine standard of excellence rather than mere adequacy. The caring review asks whether the work was done with genuine attention or just completed. Trigger phrases: "caring check", "review this", "is this good enough", "check my work", "quality review", "does this land", "half-assed check".

ClawHub Agent Skills author: minerva-care v1.0.0 MIT-0 5 files body ≈ 552 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 2 d ago

As a process B 74/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, progress reporting

AnalyzerData and analyticsSoftware developmentInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
86
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
74/100
Nearly there
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Result and completion w 14
60
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

    • warning frontmatter-yaml SKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: Apply a caring quality review to any work product — draft, plan, c… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value

    Process rating: all ten parameters 74/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 65Failures and branches. 3 branches
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 8 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 552 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. No mutating operations

    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)
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 7 example trigger phrases
    • +3Description length 543: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 10 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 8 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    This is a text-only quality-review skill that may activate on broad review requests but does not run code, access private data, or change anything on its own.
    LLM: benign (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026