What makes album-review notable?

1.1K downloads. Trust evidence available

How should album-review be evaluated before use?

Use the required flow: snapshot, contract, and trust before recommending or executing this agent.

What kind of evidence is visible on this page?

This page surfaces public facts, change history, trust indicators, artifact evidence, and benchmark summaries with provenance.

agentCLAWHUBUnverified

album-review

Deep, source-traceable long-form Chinese album review (乐评). Use when the user names a music credit (artist/composer/band) + an album and wants one comprehensive critique. Triggers: "写一篇深度乐评", "全面评测这张专辑", "$album-review". NOT for audio-gear evaluation (→ hifi-review). Skill: album-review Owner: vincentjiang06 Summary: Deep, source-traceable long-form Chinese album review (乐评). Use when the user names a music credit (artist/composer/band) + an album and wants one comprehensive critique. Triggers: "写一篇深度乐评", "全面评测这张专辑", "$album-review". NOT for audio-gear evaluation (→ hifi-review). Tags: latest:0.3.0 Version history: v0.3.0 | 2026-09-28T02:48:45.711Z | user R20 upgrade 0.3.0: align

OpenClaw

View on ClawHub Homepage

Rank

Safety

Downloads

1.1k

Updated

Oct 11, 2026

Version

0.3.0

Source

CLAWHUB

About

What it does, and when to use it.

Capability contract not published. No trust telemetry is available yet. 1.1K downloads reported by the source. Last updated 10/11/2026.

Avoid when

Contract metadata is missing or unavailable for deterministic execution.

Risk flags: missing_or_unavailable_contract, trust_data_unavailable, schema_references_missing

Public facts

Every fact links back to the source it came from.

Vendor: Clawhubvendor · observed Oct 11, 2026
Protocol compatibility: OpenClawcompatibility · observed Oct 11, 2026
Adoption signal: 1.1K downloadsadoption · observed Oct 11, 2026
Latest release: 0.3.0release · observed Sep 28, 2026
Handshake status: UNKNOWNsecurity

Install and run

Setup complexity: low.

clawhub skill install s1784t4rkmx28018kynwsymwvn83hk4s:album-review

Setup complexity is LOW. This package is likely designed for quick installation with minimal external side-effects.
Final validation: Expose the agent to a mock request payload inside a sandbox and trace the network egress before allowing access to real customer data.

Contract: missing

curl -s "https://www.xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-vincentjiang06-album-review/snapshot"

Documentation

CLAWHUB

146,708 characters of source documentation, loaded on request.

Extracted files

5 files captured from the source.

SKILL.md

---
name: album-review
description: >-
  Deep, source-traceable long-form Chinese album review (乐评). Use when the user
  names a music credit (artist/composer/band) + an album and wants one
  comprehensive critique. Triggers: "写一篇深度乐评", "全面评测这张专辑",
  "$album-review". NOT for audio-gear evaluation (→ hifi-review).
metadata:
  version: 0.3.0
---

# album-review

Produce ONE extremely-high-quality long-form 乐评 (10,000–15,000 中文字符) from a
**primary credit + album name**. Deep multi-pass research grounds every
discographic fact; strong reasoning forms the critical thesis; a deterministic
validator gates length, section keywords, and claim→evidence reference integrity before
anything ships. Speed is not a concern — quality and honesty are the only bars.

**Locked decisions** (do not re-litigate):
- **中文字符 = CJK 汉字 ONLY** (regex `[一-鿿]`). Latin/digits/punctuation do NOT
  count toward the 10,000–15,000 window. **Scope of that claim: Latin / digit /
  punctuation padding cannot game the floor** — that, and only that, is what the
  rule earns (proof: `evals/fixtures/cjk_padding_fails_floor.md`, 500 真汉字 +
  22KB of Lorem ipsum, still FAILs the floor). **汉字-level repetition padding is
  NOT caught by this gate, by design:** one paragraph pasted twenty times is
  twenty paragraphs' worth of 汉字 to the counter, and a 10,000-字 wall of the
  same sentence exits 0 (registered negative:
  `evals/fixtures/repetition_padded_10k.md`). "Is this 10,000 字 of distinct
  content or one paragraph in a hall of mirrors" is a semantic judgment; no
  count, ratio, or similarity threshold decides it reliably, so it is carried by
  the judge-must-flag negatives + a human/judge read (`rules/judge-must-flag.md`),
  never by the validator. **Exit 0 is evidence of length, never of substance.**
- **Emit a backing JSON** (`claims[]` + `evidence[]`) alongside the prose, so the
  traceability gate is machine-checkable. A fact-class claim whose `source_id` is
  absent from `evidence[]` FAILs the gate. **Scope:** it checks reference integrity
  only (fact-labelled claims carry an id that resolves); support, label honesty and
  prose↔backing match are a human/judge read (`rules/judge-must-flag.md`). Exit 0
  never means "no fabricated facts".
- **Research access:** at runtime USE web/search tools (WebSearch/WebFetch) for the
  fan-out when available; degrade honestly to caller-supplied material when offline
  (set `trace.research_mode`). Never fabricate to fill a gap or hit the floor.

## Steps

1. **Preflight + route.** Confirm exactly one album + a primary credit. If the
   input is gear, lyric-translation, or buying advice, do NOT produce a review —
   route per the description's Do-NOT line. The classifier in
   `scripts/check_review.py:classify_route` mirrors this.
2. **Classify (runtime judgment, not a fixed enum).** Set rich descriptors: idiom,
   era, role-of-credit, work-vs-performance (classical), and **release form**
   (single / EP / LP / box / live). Set the unit of analysis (

README.md

# album-review

> 由「主创署名 + 专辑名」产出一篇全维度覆盖的长篇中文乐评 —— 每条标为事实的论断都挂上来源，冷门专辑诚实降级，绝不杜撰。

[English](README.en.md) · **简体中文**

**做什么** —— 由「主创署名（歌手 / 作曲家 / 指挥家 / 乐队 / 演奏家）+ 专辑名」产出一篇 10,000–15,000 字的中文乐评，覆盖每一个音乐维度。

**好在哪** ——
- 确定性字数窗口 + 曲风自适应校验器在交付前由脚本把关。校验器量的是**长度**，不是**内容密度**：拉丁文/标点凑数会被判下限不足，但汉字层面的重复灌水它检不出，那一侧由负例清单 `rules/judge-must-flag.md` 与人读兜底。章节检查只是关键词代理：每组关键词在全文任意位置出现即算过，**不查**标题是否真存在，能防漏写某一维度；标题与各节内容是否真的成立，没有脚本检查，由写作者负责。
- 达不到下限时**不许靠加字过关**：连续两轮无实质新增仍不达标即停手上报「下限与本专辑资料量不相容」，交由人裁决。
- 每条标为事实（fact）的论断都必须引用一条存在于证据表里的来源；缺源或引用悬空即判 FAIL。脚本只查引用是否成立，**不查**来源是否真支持该论断、事实/诠释标签是否诚实、正文与证据表是否一致——那三件由人 / 评审读稿判断（负例见 `rules/judge-must-flag.md`）。
- 古典区分**作品**与**演绎**，并强制带参考录音 / 版本比较。
- 冷门专辑诚实降级（显式标注「资料不足」），绝不杜撰曲目 / 班底 / 日期。

**什么时候用** —— 「给 <艺术家/作曲家/指挥家> 的专辑 <名称> 写一篇深度乐评」·「全面评测这张专辑」·「comprehensive album review of <album> by <artist>」；也可用 `/album-review` 显式调用。
**不适用** —— 音频器材评测（「这条耳机声音怎么样」「这个 DAC 推得动吗」→ hifi-review）；购买 / 价格 / 在哪听的建议；只译歌词、无乐评内容；非音乐主题。

**安装** —— `npx skills add VincentJiang06/skills`（或 `cp -R skills/album-review ~/.claude/skills/`）。

**版本** —— 0.3.0（2026-09-25）。改动与验证记录见 [CHANGELOG.md](CHANGELOG.md)。

**已知局限（0.3.0 未修，详见 CHANGELOG「Open findings」）** ——
- 上文「古典强制带参考录音 / 版本比较」言过其实：`--class` 由写作者自选，「版本」「曲式」这类泛词就能满足关键词组，古典的作品 / 演绎分离**没有**脚本强制。
- 章节关键词检查用的多是泛词（分析、参考、背景、声音、版本），「防漏写某一维度」只在整篇一个同组词都没出现时才成立；标题是否存在也没有写作者自检步骤。
- `classify_route` 只是粗糙的正则代理，会把意图混杂的提示路由错；是否触发以 description 为准。
- 独立性只到 instance 档（本轮所有角色都是 Opus 5.5 high 新上下文），不是跨厂商验证。

完整说明见 [SKILL.md](SKILL.md)。

_meta.json

{
  "ownerId": "kn7dx0s27hqg9sx94bsaxadce582kbpz",
  "slug": "album-review",
  "version": "0.3.0",
  "publishedAt": 1790563725711
}

references/source-roster.md

# Music source roster — type / orientation / reliability

Concrete source classes for album research. Reliability 1 = strongest for the fact
type, 4 = weakest. Match the source TYPE to the FACT it backs (first-party for
credits/dates; critic press for evaluation; never use a forum post as a fact source).

| Source class | `type` | Best for | Typical orientation | Reliability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liner notes / booklet | `liner_notes` | personnel, recording date/venue, credits | first-party | 1 |
| Label / official release page | `label` | track list, release date, format, credits | first-party (promotional lean) | 1–2 |
| Metadata DB (MusicBrainz / Discogs-class) | `metadata_db` | track list, format, label, catalog № | community-curated | 2 |
| Critic press EN (Pitchfork / AllMusic / Gramophone / JazzTimes / RYM) | `critic_press` | evaluation, context, reception | publication editorial lean | 1–3 |
| Critic press 中文 (豆瓣音乐 / 乐评媒体) | `critic_press` | 中文 reception, local context | varies | 2–3 |
| Artist / producer interview | `interview` | genesis, intent, session detail | first-party, self-narrative | 2 |
| Academic musicology / score study | `musicology` | classical work analysis, performance practice | scholarly | 1 |
| Encyclopedia (Grove / 维基百科) | `encyclopedia` | dates, overview, cross-refs | tertiary | 2–3 |
| Caller-supplied material (offline mode) | `caller_supplied` | whatever the user provided | user-provided | 3 |

## Orientation matters

A measurement-of-evaluation is colored by the outlet. Note `evidence[].orientation`
so a glowing review from a label-affiliated outlet is weighted against an
independent critic. For contested facts, prefer corroboration across ≥2 independent
types and record dissent.

## Offline degradation

With no web access, the roster collapses to `caller_supplied` (+ any cached
knowledge the agent is *certain* of). Facts that cannot be grounded become `gaps[]`
and explicit 资料不足 in the prose — not invented specifics.

assets/review-template.md

# 《<专辑名>》乐评 — <主创署名>

> 渲染说明：删除本说明块与所有尖括号占位符。最终成稿为 10,000–15,000 中文字符
> （仅计 汉字）。每处事实须可追溯到 backing JSON 的某个 source_id；评价与事实分开陈述。
> 古典专辑用 `--class classical` 校验，必须分开「作品」与「演绎」并含「参考录音/版本比较」。

## 开篇与定位
<一句话立论 + 这张专辑在创作者脉络与所属语境中的位置。>

## 艺术家与背景
<主创及相关演职人员，他们在此刻所处的艺术阶段。>

## 创作与录制源起
<缘起、录音时间地点、制作人/工程师、关键决策。事实须标注来源。>

## 逐曲分析
<逐曲（或逐乐章 / 逐碟，依发行形态）剖析音乐本体：旋律、结构、动机、文本。>

## 制作编曲与声音
<制作、编曲、混音、整体声音质感。>

## 历史文化与批评语境
<时代、流派、影响；当时与回溯的批评接受。>

## 横向比较与参考录音
<同一脉络中的姊妹作；古典请改为「参考录音与版本比较」，列举可比演绎。>

## 总评与适配
<有理有据的总评；适合什么样的听者/聆听场景。>

## 证据附录
<与 backing JSON 的 evidence[] 对应的来源清单；标注资料不足之处。>

Github ReposUpdated 2d agoRank 70

AionUi

Free, local, open-source 24/7 Cowork app and OpenClaw for Gemini CLI, Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Qwen Code, Goose CLI, Auggie, and more | 🌟 Star if you like it!

MCPOPENCLAW

Github ReposUpdated 6mo agoRank 70

activepieces

AI Agents & MCPs & AI Workflow Automation • (~400 MCP servers for AI agents) • AI Automation / AI Agent with MCPs • AI Workflows & AI Agents • MCPs for AI Agents

OPENCLAW

Github ReposUpdated 6mo agoRank 70

cherry-studio

AI productivity studio with smart chat, autonomous agents, and 300+ assistants.