Weekly Self Improve Loop
PendingStatic analysis audit pending.
Overview
No static analysis result has been recorded yet. Pattern checks will appear here once the artifact has been analyzed.
Findings (0)
Artifact-based informational review of SKILL.md, metadata, install specs, static scan signals, and capability signals. ClawScan does not execute the skill or run runtime probes.
The agent could persist new or modified instructions that affect how it behaves in future tasks.
The workflow directs the agent to create or update local skills based on extracted patterns, but the artifact does not require user confirmation, review of generated content, or rollback before changing agent behavior.
$skillPath = "skills/local/$skillName-recovery" ... Write-Host " Updating existing skill..." ... Write-Host " Creating new skill..."
Make report generation the default, and require explicit user approval with a visible diff before creating or updating any skill.
Sensitive or misleading memory entries could be reused to shape future agent behavior or appear in local reports or generated skill names.
The skill reads recent memory files and extracts blocker text, then uses the resulting patterns to guide persistent skill creation or updates.
$memoryFiles = Get-ChildItem "memory/" -Filter "*.md" ... $content = Get-Content $file.FullName -Raw ... $blockers = [regex]::Matches($content, "Blocker: (.+)")
Bound the memory paths, exclude sensitive entries, sanitize extracted blocker text, and require user review before any extracted pattern is persisted.
If enabled, the agent may initiate periodic self-improvement actions rather than waiting for a manual review request.
The artifact encourages recurring self-use based on a calendar condition. There is no background code in the artifacts, but the instruction can lead an agent to invoke the workflow without a fresh direct user request.
### 1. Weekly Review (Every 7 Days) ... ## Self-Use Trigger ... Use when: - Day of week = Sunday (or configured)
Require a user prompt or scheduled approval gate before running the weekly review, especially before any persistent changes.
Local reports or generated skill names could still reveal specific blocker wording if memory entries contain sensitive details.
The privacy claim is partly reassuring, but the workflow also extracts exact "Blocker: ..." text as pattern keys, so users should not assume only numeric counts are handled.
## Privacy/Safety - Aggregate data only (no specifics) - Rates and counts, not content
Clarify that blocker labels may be processed, and redact or generalize them before reporting or using them in generated skills.