SKILLEMALL.ai

AB ethical-thinking

Use this skill when the user asks for ethical thinking (including naming it or directing use/apply/run with obvious misspellings; decisive) or wants a structured pass on values and harms—mapping stakeholders, tradeoffs, power asymmetries, harms and benefits, consent, justice, and fair process for a plan or product. Use for moral review, fairness or AI-ethics style questions, stakeholder harm scans, or should-we questions beyond pure legality, including indirect asks. Skip when they want legal advice as such, only neutral facts with no normative review requested, or implementation-only work with no values lens asked for.

ClawHub Agent Skills author: Siva Sai v2026.5.17 MIT-0 2 files body ≈ 784 tokens Open the sourceclawhub.ai analyzed 2 d ago

As a process B 66/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, progress reporting

IntegrationOperations and projectsInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
81
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
B
66/100
Nearly there
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
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: 2. 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 66/100

    • 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
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 70Failures and branches. 5 branches
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 12 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 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)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 627: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 11 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 12 items
    • +1License stated

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

    External checks

    ClawHub: clean
    This is a markdown-only ethics review framework that does not add code execution, data access, persistence, or hidden behavior.
    LLM: benign (high) · 28 May 2026