ClawHub Release Auditor

Run a strict preflight before any publish. Prefer stopping with a precise explanation over guessing. Treat repeated versions as a signal that the workflow needs diagnosis, not just another upload.

Workflow

1. Preflight
• Run python3 scripts/preflight.py .
• Fix all hard errors before continuing.
• Read warnings carefully; they often explain why a skill ends up suspicious.

1. Package locally
• Run python3 ~/project/openclaw/skills/skill-creator/scripts/package_skill.py [output-dir].
• If packaging fails, stop and explain the exact validation error.

1. Confirm before publish
• Show the skill path, intended version, and any remaining warnings.
• Do not publish without explicit user confirmation.

1. Publish
• Publish from the skill folder, not the .skill archive.
• After publish, record the exact version that was attempted.

1. Verify post-publish state
• Run python3 scripts/verify_publish.py --expected-version .
• If latest/version visibility is inconsistent, say so clearly.
• If scan results matter, check the web page separately and explain whether the issue is pending, version mismatch, or a likely metadata/code mismatch.

What to check during preflight

• Frontmatter only uses supported keys.
• name and description are present and sane.
• Placeholder text is not leaking into examples.
• Declared metadata.openclaw.requires roughly matches real script usage.
• Homepage/source metadata exists when possible.
• Publish path points to the skill directory, not the packaged archive.
• Local package validation passes before any publish attempt.

Common failure patterns

Frontmatter mismatch

If validation complains about unsupported keys, trust the validator. Do not invent alternate formats from memory.

Metadata drift

If scripts use env vars or binaries that the skill does not declare, expect suspicious scan results. Fix the declaration or the code.

Placeholder leakage

If docs contain example paths like /path/to/..., make sure they are clearly examples and not presented as real files.

Repeated publish loops

If many versions are being published quickly, pause and diagnose:

• Did packaging actually succeed?
• Did latest move?
• Is scan still reading an older version?
• Is the same metadata mismatch still present?

Scripts

scripts/preflight.py

Checks a skill directory for:

• frontmatter problems
• placeholder text
• likely undeclared env vars and binaries
• external execution hints
• package validation failures
• a simple verdict: do-not-publish, review-before-publish, or ready-to-package

scripts/verify_publish.py

Checks published version state with clawhub inspect and compares it to an expected version.

scripts/analyze_history.py

Inspects recent version history for a public skill and groups releases into rough categories such as docs, metadata, bugfix, and feature work. Use it to study repeated publish loops and sharpen the skill's heuristics.

scripts/failure_buckets.py

Classifies likely publish problems into practical buckets such as frontmatter-invalid, package-validation-failed, latest-not-updated, or no-hard-failure-detected.

scripts/release_worthiness.py

Compares a local skill directory against the latest published version and flags when there is no material diff. Use it to avoid unnecessary republish loops.

Publishing tips

SKILL.md body must have substantial content

ClawHub checks for "Skill content is too thin or templated." This evaluates the SKILL.md body text (markdown below frontmatter), not just the description field.

Why this matters:

• The description field is only used for UI/search summaries
• The SKILL.md body is what gets embedded and evaluated for the thin-content check
• If SKILL.md has only frontmatter and no body text, it will fail even with a perfect description

How to avoid:

• Always include substantive body content in SKILL.md (at least 300-500 words of meaningful guidance)
• Include real workflow guidance, usage examples, and operational notes in the body
• The more comprehensive the SKILL.md body, the less likely it triggers "templated" detection

Other common pitfalls

• homepage field: Include a valid URL to avoid warnings
• Empty directories: Remove any empty scripts/, references/, or other directories before packaging
• Symlinks: These are rejected by the packager and cause failures

References

• Read references/checklist.md for the release checklist.
• Read references/research-notes.md when designing heuristics for repeated publish loops and common failure modes.
• If the skill format or server behavior is unclear, read the official ClawHub skill format docs before guessing. Prefer current docs plus validator output over old habits.