SKILLEMALL.ai
RU Sign in

AD code-review

コードレビューを実施する際に使用。プルリクエストのレビュー、コード品質チェック、 セキュリティ検査、パフォーマンス分析を行う。「レビューして」「コードをチェック」 「品質を確認」などの指示で起動。

ClawHub Agent Skills author: terrycarter1985 v1.1.0 MIT-0 4 files body ≈ 784 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai↗ analyzed 2 d ago

As a process D 49/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

AnalyzerSoftware developmentInfrastructuretype 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
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
81
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
49/100
Unfinished process
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten
This is a copy of a skill from another catalog; the rating counts the canonical one: code-review (ClawHub)

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 · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Secrets in code secret-password-literal reference.md:418
      Hard-coded password / key literal (may be an example) (placeholder value)
      const API_KEY = "sk-1…def";
      placeholder

    Files scanned: 4. 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 49/100

    • 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
    • 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (code-review) differs from the folder (code-review-terry)
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 68 steps
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 784 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

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Description length 98: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Structure: 21 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 68 items
    • +4Has examples (7 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 81.

    External checks

    ClawHub: suspicious
    This is a legitimate code-review guide, but it can tell an agent to fix CI failures and push commits under your GitHub account without a clear approval step.
    LLM: suspicious (high) · VirusTotal: · 29 May 2026