openclaw-traffic-guardian

OpenClaw runtime traffic monitoring baseline for opt-in HTTP/HTTPS proxy inspection, egress detection, inbound injection detection, and social-account policy review.

Quality

68%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/openclaw-traffic-guardian/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is highly actionable with explicit validation gates and concrete executable commands, scoring well on actionability and workflow clarity. Its main weaknesses are a large inline verification script that should be a referenced file and a referenced SPEC.md that is absent from the bundle.

Suggestions

Move the release-artifact verification bash block into scripts/ (e.g. scripts/verify-release.sh) and reference it one level deep, keeping only a short invocation in the body.

Either ship the referenced SPEC.md in the bundle or note explicitly that it is generated/populated at first implementation so the reference is not dangling.

Trim the justification prose (e.g., 'It intentionally does not ship a proxy or runtime implementation yet.') since the Out-of-Scope section already conveys this.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly terse with bullet lists and a table, but the ~70-line release-verification bash block is heavy inline content that could be moved into the (currently empty) scripts/ folder, fitting the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	It provides copy-paste-ready executable commands (the install one-liner and a complete curl/openssl/jq/shasum verification script) plus concrete path-to-purpose mapping, matching the fully-executable anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The release-verification flow is a clearly sequenced risky operation with explicit validation checkpoints (fingerprint and checksum mismatch both exit) and a gate ('Only install or extract the archive after this verification succeeds'), matching the explicit-validation anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	It references SPEC.md and placeholder folders and has real section organization, but the large verification script is inline rather than split into a one-level-deep scripts/ reference and the referenced SPEC.md is not present in the bundle, fitting the 'structure present but could be better organized' anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

60%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description conveys specific capabilities but relies on technical/product jargon and omits any explicit 'Use when' trigger guidance. It is distinguishable but not sharply, leaving it solidly mid-tier.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural user-facing triggers (e.g., 'Use when an operator wants to inspect OpenClaw runtime traffic, detect exfiltration, or review social-account writes').

Replace or supplement jargon-heavy terms ('inbound injection detection', 'egress detection') with phrasings a user would naturally say, such as 'detect outbound data leaks' and 'detect injected requests'.

Tighten distinctiveness by foregrounding the operator-scoped, opt-in nature of the monitoring so it does not read like a generic security scanner.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple concrete capabilities — 'opt-in HTTP/HTTPS proxy inspection, egress detection, inbound injection detection, and social-account policy review' — rather than vague language, matching the multiple-specific-actions anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	It clearly answers 'what does this do' with the capability list but has no 'Use when...' or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the guidelines caps completeness at 2.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Domain keywords are present but lean on product/jargon terms ('inbound injection detection', 'egress detection') that a user would not naturally say; missing common user-facing variations, so it sits at the 'some relevant keywords' anchor rather than full coverage.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	It is niche and product-specific to OpenClaw, but the specialized jargon could still overlap conceptually with generic security-monitoring skills, placing it at 'somewhat specific but could overlap' rather than a clean distinct niche.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: prompt-security/clawsec
Path: skills/openclaw-traffic-guardian/SKILL.md
Commit: c6194eb

Reviewed: 14 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.