Skills/ClawHub/interview-review

interview-review@1.0.0

CAUTION· static only

Publisher claims: "帮求职者复盘真实面试,分析表现并给出改进建议。当用户面试结束后说"帮我复盘面试""刚面完想分析下""这场面试我表现怎么样""帮我看看哪里答得不好""面试录音/记录帮我分析",或贴出面试问答记录、面试转写文本希望诊断时触发。本技能识别表达亮点与风险、分析面试官考察意图、给出可执行的优化方向和参考回答。即使用户没明说..." Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.

Registry ClawHubPublisher shutongzhou1222 · publishing for 140 daysInstalls 542Last detonated 2d ago

Coverage

Static only; nothing was run yet.

The label rests on the code, the instruction files and the publisher. The honeypot run replaces this verdict when it completes.

Is [email protected] safe to install?

KillerSkills analysed it statically (a sandbox run is pending) on 2026-11-12 and scored it 70/100 (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 164 lines in 2 files.

Cost to the agent

Instructions loaded
≈816 tok
1 file · 2 in bundle

Tokens estimated at four characters each. Skills load their instruction text when triggered; the figure is what that costs.

Known vulnerabilities

Vulnerability advisories (OSV) cover npm and PyPI packages; this registry has no advisory database.

What would make this Verified

10 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%
  1. Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim shutongzhou1222: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.
Publish a new version to ClawHub, then queue it here. Not your skill? Claim the handle to get verdict changes by email.Claim shutongzhou1222Propose a patch to the maintainer