Skills/ClawHub/expert-panel-review

expert-panel-review@1.0.0

CAUTION

Publisher claims: "把一份方案、文档或决策同时交给 3–5 个立场冲突的专家视角审， 产出「共识 / 分歧 / 盲区 / 若只改一条」四段结论，让拍板前的漏洞先浮出来。 当用户说「让几个专家看看」「多角度审一下」「会诊一下」「帮我挑毛病」 「这个方案有什么问题」「换个角度看看有没有坑」「拍板前再过一遍」时使用。 和"专家团协作"不是一回事：不开会、不分工、不投票、不画流程图， 只做视角并置与分歧显性化——价值在于暴露单一视角的盲区，不在于模拟团队协作。 不适用于：事实核查（该去查资料）、只需一个专业判断的任务、 已有明确标准答案的问题、以及任何需要真人资质背书的最终决策。 Use when: multi-perspective review, expert panel, devil's advocate, red team, second opinion, 多角度审, 会诊, 挑毛病, 换个角度, 拍板前。" Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.

Registry ClawHubPublisher junci003 · joined 5 days agoInstalls 141Last detonated 2 h ago
What would fix thisWatchDispute verdict

Is [email protected] safe to install?

KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-10-27 and scored it 67/100 (Caution). It is not known to be malicious, but it has behaviour or code a security policy should decide on before install. Summary: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.

Behavior trace

Queued for honeypot run · static analysis only
t+CategoryObserved action

This version has not been detonated yet. The score above counts behavior as unknown (50/100), so it cannot read Verified until the honeypot run completes and replaces this verdict.

Static findings

No findings across 241 lines in 2 files.

What would make this Verified

13 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%
  1. Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim junci003: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
  2. New publisher≈ +3 on the totalTime clears this on its own after 14 and 30 days. Claiming the handle (+50) is the fastest way past it.
Publish a new version to ClawHub, then queue it here. Not your skill? Claim the handle to get verdict changes by email.Claim junci003