healthcheck
Host security hardening and risk-tolerance configuration for OpenClaw deployments. Use when a user asks for security audits, firewall/SSH/update hardening, risk posture, exposure review, OpenClaw cron scheduling for periodic checks, or version status checks on a machine running OpenClaw (laptop, workstation, Pi, VPS).
91
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
95%
2.11xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong skill description that clearly communicates specific capabilities, provides explicit trigger guidance via a 'Use when...' clause, and includes a rich set of natural keywords users would employ. The description is concise yet comprehensive, and the OpenClaw-specific context makes it highly distinctive from other potential security-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: security audits, firewall/SSH/update hardening, risk posture configuration, exposure review, cron scheduling for periodic checks, and version status checks. These are clearly defined capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (host security hardening and risk-tolerance configuration for OpenClaw deployments) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing specific trigger scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'security audits', 'firewall', 'SSH', 'hardening', 'risk posture', 'exposure review', 'cron scheduling', 'version status', 'OpenClaw', plus device types like 'laptop', 'workstation', 'Pi', 'VPS'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific 'OpenClaw' product context combined with host-level security hardening. The combination of OpenClaw-specific features (cron scheduling, version checks) with security hardening creates a clear niche unlikely to conflict with generic security or deployment skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured, highly actionable security hardening skill with excellent workflow clarity and safety guardrails. Its main weakness is length—it could be more concise by trimming redundant explanations and splitting reference material (command accuracy, logging, memory writes) into separate files. The explicit confirmation requirements and validation steps make it robust for destructive/security-sensitive operations.
Suggestions
Extract the 'OpenClaw command accuracy', 'Logging and audit trail', and 'Memory writes' sections into a separate REFERENCE.md file and link to it, reducing the main skill's token footprint.
Remove the verbatim non-technical prompt examples in step 1—Claude can generate user-friendly questions without being given exact phrasings for each item.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is fairly long (~200+ lines) and includes some unnecessary elaboration (e.g., listing non-technical prompt examples verbatim, explaining what --fix does/doesn't do multiple times, the model self-check section). However, most content is task-specific and not explaining concepts Claude already knows, so it's not egregiously verbose. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides exact CLI commands (openclaw security audit --deep, ss -ltnup, ufw status, tmutil status, etc.), specific flag options, concrete numbered choices for users, and explicit cron job naming conventions. Guidance is copy-paste ready and specific throughout. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is clearly numbered 0-8 with explicit sequencing, validation checkpoints (step 8 re-checks firewall, ports, access, and re-runs audit), confirmation requirements before every state-changing action, rollback planning in step 5, and a feedback loop (stop on unexpected output). The 'Required confirmations' section adds an additional safety layer. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is entirely self-contained in one file with no references to supplementary documents for advanced topics. While sections are well-organized with clear headers, the memory writes section, periodic checks, logging, and command accuracy sections could be split into reference files. The single reference to docs/reference/templates/AGENTS.md is appropriate but the overall document is monolithic for its length. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- trpc-group/trpc-agent-go
- Commit
af8bd5f
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.