BF libtv-cli
LibTV 官方 CLI(libtv):在命令行里完整操作 / 运行 LibTV 画布。 凡是和 LibTV 画布 / 项目 / 节点 / 模型 / 素材相关的操作,一律通过 libtv CLI 完成, 不要自己捏造 HTTP 请求或绕到网页端步骤。本 skill 内即包含完整的 CLI 命令操作手册; 常见场景见 examples/,安装/更新见 scripts/install.md。
LibTV 官方 CLI(libtv):在命令行里完整操作 / 运行 LibTV 画布。 凡是和 LibTV 画布 / 项目 / 节点 / 模型 / 素材相关的操作,一律通过 libtv CLI 完成, 不要自己捏造 HTTP 请求或绕到网页端步骤。本 skill 内即包含完整的 CLI 命令操作手册; 常见场景见…
As a process F 18/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../../.docs/skill-write-convention.md
The same skill appears in 1 more place: ClawHub
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 contains commands that delete files, rewrite disks or execute code fetched from the network. The agent may run them without asking if it believes the instructions require it.
Replace destructive commands with safe equivalents that ask for confirmation, scope them to one folder, and stop piping curl into a shell: pin a version and a checksum.
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 · 2
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 2
-
medium Dangerous commands
cmd-execpolicy-bypassscripts/install.md:59Runs PowerShell with execution policy bypassedSet-ExecutionPolicy -Scope Process -ExecutionPolicy Bypass
-
low Dangerous commands
cmd-execpolicy-bypassscripts/install-libtv-cli.ps1:3Runs PowerShell with execution policy bypassed (code comment)# powershell -NoProfile -ExecutionPolicy Bypass -File inst…ps1
comment
Files scanned: 46. 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: ../../.docs/skill-write-convention.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 18/100
- 0Tools and files. 1 referenced file(s) missing: ../../.docs/skill-write-convention.md
- 0Steps. Prose only: no discrete steps
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 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
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 30Running it twice. 4 mutating operations with no state check
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 713 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)
- +4Structure: 2 headings, hard to scan
- +3No numbered steps or checklist
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +4No input/output examples
- -32 of 2 scripts are never mentioned in SKILL.md
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 195: enough signal without eating the budget
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 52.