openclaw/clawhub
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/openclaw/clawhub.git synced 2026-07-22 03:35:29 -04:00
Code Issues 183 Packages Projects Releases 1 Wiki Activity

submit-to-agentbeat: Skill incorrectly flagged — request scan breakdown #194

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-02-15 17:16:08 -05:00 by yindo · 0 comments
yindo commented 2026-02-15 17:16:08 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link
Copy Source

Originally created by @togodn2 on GitHub (Feb 15, 2026).

Summary

Our skill submit-to-agentbeat (GitHub) was flagged by ClawHub Security as "suspicious patterns detected." We are the authors of this skill and believe it has been incorrectly flagged. We would like to understand the specific scan results so we can either fix any remaining issues or confirm that it is a false positive.

About the skill

  • Name: submit-to-agentbeat
  • Purpose: Guides AI agents through the full flow of creating an EVM wallet, registering an ERC-8004 identity on-chain, integrating x402 payments, and submitting to the AgentBeat platform for indexing and rewards.
  • Content: Technical documentation, shell/Node examples, security considerations, and references to official specs (ERC-8004, x402, AgentBeat API). No prompts that override or jailbreak agent behavior; no requests to download or execute external binaries; no social engineering.

What we’ve already done

After seeing the warning, we reviewed the skill for patterns that might trigger security scanners and made the following changes:

  • Replaced imperative phrasing (e.g. "Before doing anything else" → "As a first step").
  • Removed strong blocking language (e.g. "Do not proceed until" → "Ensure you understand ... before continuing").
  • Softened checklist wording ("stop and resolve" → "resolve before continuing").
  • Replaced all-caps emphasis ("CRITICAL", "WRONG") with normal emphasis ("Important", "Incorrect").

We want to align with ClawHub’s expectations and are happy to adjust further if we know what triggered the flag.

Request

Could you please share:

  1. Why this skill was flagged — which patterns or rules triggered the "suspicious patterns" result?
  2. What we should change — concrete guidance (e.g. wording, structure, or frontmatter) so the skill passes the scan while keeping its intended behavior.

We’re happy to provide the current SKILL.md or a link to the repo if that helps. Thank you for maintaining security and for any feedback you can give.

Contact

Originally created by @togodn2 on GitHub (Feb 15, 2026). ## Summary Our skill **submit-to-agentbeat** ([GitHub](https://github.com/STPDevteam/submit-to-agentbeat)) was flagged by ClawHub Security as "suspicious patterns detected." We are the authors of this skill and believe it has been incorrectly flagged. We would like to understand the specific scan results so we can either fix any remaining issues or confirm that it is a false positive. ## About the skill - **Name:** submit-to-agentbeat - **Purpose:** Guides AI agents through the full flow of creating an EVM wallet, registering an ERC-8004 identity on-chain, integrating x402 payments, and submitting to the AgentBeat platform for indexing and rewards. - **Content:** Technical documentation, shell/Node examples, security considerations, and references to official specs (ERC-8004, x402, AgentBeat API). No prompts that override or jailbreak agent behavior; no requests to download or execute external binaries; no social engineering. ## What we’ve already done After seeing the warning, we reviewed the skill for patterns that might trigger security scanners and made the following changes: - Replaced imperative phrasing (e.g. "Before doing anything else" → "As a first step"). - Removed strong blocking language (e.g. "Do not proceed until" → "Ensure you understand ... before continuing"). - Softened checklist wording ("stop and resolve" → "resolve before continuing"). - Replaced all-caps emphasis ("CRITICAL", "WRONG") with normal emphasis ("Important", "Incorrect"). We want to align with ClawHub’s expectations and are happy to adjust further if we know what triggered the flag. ## Request Could you please share: 1. **Why this skill was flagged** — which patterns or rules triggered the "suspicious patterns" result? 2. **What we should change** — concrete guidance (e.g. wording, structure, or frontmatter) so the skill passes the scan while keeping its intended behavior. We’re happy to provide the current `SKILL.md` or a link to the repo if that helps. Thank you for maintaining security and for any feedback you can give. ## Contact - **Repo:** https://github.com/STPDevteam/submit-to-agentbeat - **Skill homepage:** https://github.com/STPDevteam/submit-to-agentbeat (see `SKILL.md` in the root)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
bug
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
yindo
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: openclaw/clawhub#194
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?