AC remote-browser-service
Control a remote Chrome browser via HTTP API (Kubernetes or Docker backend). Use for web automation, form filling, navigation, and page inspection on sites the user owns or has permission to access. Exposes the accessibility tree, text extraction, Chrome screenshots, VNC-native screenshots, DOM actions, and VNC actions — optimized for AI agents. Requires an active browser session (created via HTTP or WebSocket).
As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice
The same skill appears in 1 more place: ClawHub
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 6753 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/
Process rating: all ten parameters 62/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 21 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 6753 tokens
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 63 steps
- 100Failures and branches. 7 branches, has a failure section
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- 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
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 415: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 25 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 63 items
- +4Has examples (17 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 74.