results-statistics-convention-checker@1.0.0
CAUTION· static onlyPublisher claims: "用于诊断英文心理学论文 Results（结果）部分的统计报告规范，检查 M、SD、t(df)、F(df1, df2)、p 值、效应量（Cohen's d、partial η²、r 等）、置信区间的报告格式与完整性，以及统计结果与文字描述的一致性，判断是否符合 APA 风格统计报告习惯。当用户提供 Results 草稿并希望检查统计报告格式、补充效应量或置信区间、核对统计量与文字描述是否一致、或需要按 APA 格式改写统计结果陈述时触发本 Skill。仅针对 Results 部分的统计报告写作规范，不替代统计计算本身。" Observed in sandbox: static analysis only — behavior not yet observed.
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 2026-11-08 and scored it 71/100 (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 onlyThis 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 1,081 lines in 12 files.
Cost to the agent
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
9 points to 80 · weights: behavior 45%, static 25%, prompt 15%, publisher 15%- Unclaimed publisher≈ +8 on the totalClaim xxx031211: a verified publisher gets +50 on publisher trust. It is free and usually instant with GitHub sign-in.