Rank
70
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
Traction
No public download signal
Freshness
Updated 2d ago
Xpersona Agent
Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed. --- name: afrexai-claude-code-production version: "1.0.0" description: "Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed." author: "AfrexAI" license: "MIT" metadata: {"openclaw":{"emoji":"⚡"}} --- Claude Code Production Engineering The complete methodology for shipping pr
clawhub skill install skills:1kalin:afrexai-claude-code-productionOverall rank
#62
Adoption
No public adoption signal
Trust
Unknown
Freshness
Feb 25, 2026
Freshness
Last checked Feb 25, 2026
Best For
afrexai-claude-code-production is best for have, see, read workflows where OpenClaw compatibility matters.
Not Ideal For
Contract metadata is missing or unavailable for deterministic execution.
Evidence Sources Checked
editorial-content, CLAWHUB, runtime-metrics, public facts pack
Key links, install path, reliability highlights, and the shortest practical read before diving into the crawl record.
Overview
Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed. --- name: afrexai-claude-code-production version: "1.0.0" description: "Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed." author: "AfrexAI" license: "MIT" metadata: {"openclaw":{"emoji":"⚡"}} --- Claude Code Production Engineering The complete methodology for shipping pr Capability contract not published. No trust telemetry is available yet. Last updated 4/15/2026.
Trust score
Unknown
Compatibility
OpenClaw
Freshness
Feb 25, 2026
Vendor
Openclaw
Artifacts
0
Benchmarks
0
Last release
Unpublished
Install & run
clawhub skill install skills:1kalin:afrexai-claude-code-productionSetup 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.
Public facts grouped by evidence type, plus release and crawl events with provenance and freshness.
Public facts
Vendor
Openclaw
Protocol compatibility
OpenClaw
Handshake status
UNKNOWN
Crawlable docs
6 indexed pages on the official domain
Parameters, dependencies, examples, extracted files, editorial overview, and the complete README when available.
Captured outputs
Extracted files
0
Examples
6
Snippets
0
Languages
typescript
Parameters
markdown
# Project: [name] ## Tech Stack - Language: TypeScript (strict mode) - Framework: Next.js 15 App Router - Database: PostgreSQL via Drizzle ORM - Testing: Vitest + Playwright - Styling: Tailwind CSS v4 ## Architecture Rules - Max 50 lines per function, 300 lines per file - One responsibility per file - All exports typed — no `any` - Errors as values (Result type), not thrown exceptions - Database: migrations via `drizzle-kit generate` then `drizzle-kit push` ## File Structure src/ app/ → Next.js routes (thin — call services) lib/ → Business logic (pure functions) db/ → Schema, migrations, queries components/ → UI (server components default, 'use client' only when needed) types/ → Shared type definitions ## Commands - `pnpm dev` — start dev server - `pnpm test` — run vitest - `pnpm test:e2e` — run playwright - `pnpm lint` — eslint + tsc --noEmit - `pnpm db:generate` — generate migration - `pnpm db:push` — apply migration ## Conventions - Imports: absolute from `@/` (mapped to `src/`) - Naming: camelCase functions, PascalCase components/types, SCREAMING_SNAKE constants - Commits: conventional commits (feat:, fix:, refactor:, test:, docs:) - PRs: always create branch, never commit to main directly
text
node_modules/ .next/ dist/ coverage/ *.lock .git/ *.min.js *.map public/assets/
text
Task: Add user authentication with magic links Context: Using Resend for email, no password system exists yet Constraints: - Server actions only (no API routes) - Session via httpOnly cookies - Token expires in 15 minutes Acceptance: User enters email → receives link → clicks → logged in → cookie set Start with: the database schema for sessions and tokens
text
Step 1: "Create the database schema for a todo app with projects and tasks" [review output] Step 2: "Now add the CRUD service layer for tasks — pure functions, no framework imports" [review output] Step 3: "Now the API routes that call those services — input validation with zod"
text
TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'id') at getUserById (src/lib/users.ts:23:15)
text
I'm deciding between these approaches for real-time updates: A) Server-Sent Events from Next.js API routes B) WebSocket via separate service C) Polling every 5 seconds Context: 500 concurrent users, updates every 30 seconds on average, deployed on Vercel. What are the tradeoffs? Recommend one with reasoning.
Editorial read
Docs source
CLAWHUB
Editorial quality
ready
Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed. --- name: afrexai-claude-code-production version: "1.0.0" description: "Complete Claude Code productivity system — project setup, prompting patterns, sub-agent orchestration, context management, debugging, refactoring, TDD, and shipping 10X faster. Zero scripts needed." author: "AfrexAI" license: "MIT" metadata: {"openclaw":{"emoji":"⚡"}} --- Claude Code Production Engineering The complete methodology for shipping pr
The complete methodology for shipping production code with Claude Code at 10X speed. Not installation scripts — actual patterns, workflows, and techniques that compound your output.
| Signal | Healthy | Fix |
|--------|---------|-----|
| CLAUDE.md exists at project root | ✅ | Create one (see §1) |
| .claueignore configured | ✅ | Add noise directories |
| Session context under 60% | ✅ | /compact or start fresh |
| Clear task scope before prompting | ✅ | Write task brief first |
| Tests exist for target code | ✅ | Write tests first (§7) |
| Git clean before big changes | ✅ | Commit or stash |
| Sub-agents for parallel work | ✅ | Use /new or Task tool |
| Verifying output, not trusting blindly | ✅ | Always review diffs |
Score: /8. Below 6 = slow, buggy sessions. Fix before coding.
CLAUDE.md is your project's brain. Claude reads it at session start. A good one saves thousands of tokens per session.
# Project: [name]
## Tech Stack
- Language: TypeScript (strict mode)
- Framework: Next.js 15 App Router
- Database: PostgreSQL via Drizzle ORM
- Testing: Vitest + Playwright
- Styling: Tailwind CSS v4
## Architecture Rules
- Max 50 lines per function, 300 lines per file
- One responsibility per file
- All exports typed — no `any`
- Errors as values (Result type), not thrown exceptions
- Database: migrations via `drizzle-kit generate` then `drizzle-kit push`
## File Structure
src/
app/ → Next.js routes (thin — call services)
lib/ → Business logic (pure functions)
db/ → Schema, migrations, queries
components/ → UI (server components default, 'use client' only when needed)
types/ → Shared type definitions
## Commands
- `pnpm dev` — start dev server
- `pnpm test` — run vitest
- `pnpm test:e2e` — run playwright
- `pnpm lint` — eslint + tsc --noEmit
- `pnpm db:generate` — generate migration
- `pnpm db:push` — apply migration
## Conventions
- Imports: absolute from `@/` (mapped to `src/`)
- Naming: camelCase functions, PascalCase components/types, SCREAMING_SNAKE constants
- Commits: conventional commits (feat:, fix:, refactor:, test:, docs:)
- PRs: always create branch, never commit to main directly
node_modules/
.next/
dist/
coverage/
*.lock
.git/
*.min.js
*.map
public/assets/
Rule: if Claude doesn't need to read it, ignore it. Large lock files and build artifacts waste context.
Task: Add user authentication with magic links
Context: Using Resend for email, no password system exists yet
Constraints:
- Server actions only (no API routes)
- Session via httpOnly cookies
- Token expires in 15 minutes
Acceptance: User enters email → receives link → clicks → logged in → cookie set
Start with: the database schema for sessions and tokens
Why it works: scope + constraints + acceptance criteria + starting point. Claude doesn't wander.
Bad: "Make the API more robust"
Good: "Add input validation to POST /api/users — validate email format, name 1-100 chars, reject extra fields. Return 422 with field-level errors matching this shape: { errors: { field: string, message: string }[] }"
Rule: if you can't describe the exact output shape, you don't know what you want yet. Think first.
Step 1: "Create the database schema for a todo app with projects and tasks"
[review output]
Step 2: "Now add the CRUD service layer for tasks — pure functions, no framework imports"
[review output]
Step 3: "Now the API routes that call those services — input validation with zod"
Why: Claude produces better code in focused steps than in one massive prompt. Each step builds verified context.
Bad: "It's broken"
Good: "Running pnpm test gives this error:
TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'id')
at getUserById (src/lib/users.ts:23:15)
The function expects a User object but receives undefined when the database query returns no rows. Add a null check and return a Result type."
Rule: paste the actual error. Claude is excellent at fixing bugs when it can see the stack trace.
I'm deciding between these approaches for real-time updates:
A) Server-Sent Events from Next.js API routes
B) WebSocket via separate service
C) Polling every 5 seconds
Context: 500 concurrent users, updates every 30 seconds on average, deployed on Vercel.
What are the tradeoffs? Recommend one with reasoning.
Use this for decisions, not implementation. Get the answer, THEN switch to Task Brief for building.
| Context % | Action |
|-----------|--------|
| 0-30% | Fresh. Do complex work here. |
| 30-60% | Good. Continue current task. |
| 60-80% | Getting stale. Finish current unit, then compact. |
| 80%+ | Dangerous. /compact immediately or start new session. |
/new)/compact)src/lib/auth.ts line 45" not "look at the auth code."| Scenario | Pattern | |----------|---------| | Independent features | Spawn sub-agent per feature | | Tests + implementation | One agent writes tests, main writes code | | Research + build | Sub-agent researches API docs, main builds | | Refactor + maintain | Sub-agent refactors module A, main works on B | | Code review | Sub-agent reviews your PR with fresh eyes |
Use the Task tool to:
1. Research the Stripe API for subscription billing
2. Return: webhook event types we need, API calls for create/update/cancel, error codes to handle
Task tool spawns a sub-agent with its own context. Results come back summarized. Perfect for research that would bloat your main context.
When a sub-agent finishes complex work, have it write a HANDOFF.md:
## What Was Done
- Implemented Stripe webhook handler at src/app/api/webhooks/stripe/route.ts
- Added 4 event handlers: checkout.session.completed, invoice.paid, invoice.payment_failed, customer.subscription.deleted
## Key Decisions
- Used Stripe SDK v14 (not raw HTTP) for type safety
- Webhook signature verification via stripe.webhooks.constructEvent()
- Idempotency: check processed_events table before handling
## What's Next
- Wire up subscription status updates to user table
- Add retry logic for failed database writes
- E2E test with Stripe CLI: `stripe trigger checkout.session.completed`
## Gotchas
- Must use raw body (not parsed JSON) for signature verification
- Next.js App Router: export const runtime = 'nodejs' (not edge)
Describe the symptom (what you see vs. what you expect) Error output (paste full stack trace, not summary) Bisect (when did it last work? what changed?) Unit isolate (can you reproduce in a test?) Generate hypothesis (ask Claude for 3 possible causes, ranked)
Bug: Users see stale data after updating their profile.
Expected: After PUT /api/profile, the profile page shows updated data.
Actual: Old data persists until hard refresh (Cmd+Shift+R).
Stack:
- Next.js 15 App Router
- Server component fetches user data
- Client component with form calls server action
- Server action calls db.update()
Hypothesis: Next.js is caching the server component fetch. Need to revalidate.
Can you confirm and show me the fix?
Before any refactoring session:
Before we start refactoring:
1. Run the test suite and confirm it passes: `pnpm test`
2. Commit current state: `git add -A && git commit -m "chore: pre-refactor checkpoint"`
3. Create a branch: `git checkout -b refactor/[description]`
Extract function:
Extract the email validation logic from src/lib/users.ts (lines 34-67) into a separate
function `validateEmail` in src/lib/validation.ts. Update all imports. Run tests after.
Rename across codebase:
Rename the `getUserData` function to `fetchUserProfile` across the entire codebase.
This includes: function definition, all call sites, all imports, all test references.
Run `pnpm test` and `pnpm lint` after to verify nothing broke.
Split large file:
src/lib/api.ts is 800 lines. Split it into:
- src/lib/api/users.ts (user-related functions)
- src/lib/api/projects.ts (project-related functions)
- src/lib/api/shared.ts (shared types and helpers)
- src/lib/api/index.ts (re-exports for backward compatibility)
Preserve all existing exports from the index file so no external imports break.
Run tests after each file move.
Step 1: "Write a failing test for: creating a user with valid email stores them in the database"
Step 2: [verify test fails for the right reason]
Step 3: "Now write the minimum code to make this test pass"
Step 4: [verify test passes]
Step 5: "Refactor the implementation — the test must still pass"
Write tests for a `calculateShipping` function that:
- Free shipping for orders over $100
- $5.99 flat rate for orders $50-$100
- $9.99 flat rate for orders under $50
- International orders: add $15 surcharge
- Express: 2x the base rate
- Edge cases: $0 order, negative amount (throw), exactly $50, exactly $100
Use vitest. Don't implement the function yet — just the tests.
Then: "Now implement calculateShipping to pass all tests."
git status # Clean working tree?
git pull # Up to date?
git checkout -b feat/[description] # New branch
| Scope | Commit Pattern |
|-------|---------------|
| Single function added | feat: add calculateShipping function |
| Bug fixed | fix: handle null user in profile fetch |
| Tests added | test: add shipping calculation edge cases |
| Refactor (no behavior change) | refactor: extract validation into shared module |
| Multiple related changes | Commit each logical unit separately |
| Large feature | Multiple commits on feature branch, squash on merge |
# After completing work:
"Commit the changes with an appropriate conventional commit message.
Group related files into logical commits if there are multiple concerns."
# For PR creation:
"Create a PR description for these changes. Include:
- What changed and why
- How to test it
- Any migration steps needed
- Screenshots if UI changed"
Review this code for:
1. Correctness — does it do what it claims?
2. Security — any injection, auth bypass, data leak risks?
3. Performance — N+1 queries, unnecessary re-renders, missing indexes?
4. Maintainability — clear naming, reasonable complexity, documented edge cases?
5. Testing — are the tests sufficient? Any missing cases?
Be specific. For each issue, cite the file:line and suggest a fix.
Skip style nits unless they affect readability.
I'm about to open a PR. Review all changed files (`git diff main`) for:
- Any hardcoded secrets or credentials
- TODO/FIXME/HACK comments that should be resolved
- Console.logs that should be removed
- Missing error handling
- Type assertions (as any) that should be proper types
- Missing tests for new public functions
Before deploying any Claude-generated code:
pnpm test && pnpm test:e2e)pnpm lint)tsc --noEmit)| Anti-Pattern | Why It's Bad | Fix |
|-------------|-------------|-----|
| "Build me a full app" in one prompt | Context explosion, mediocre everything | Break into 5-10 focused tasks |
| Accepting code without reading it | Bugs compound, technical debt grows | Review every diff. Question anything unclear. |
| Re-prompting the same thing hoping for different results | Wastes tokens and context | Change your prompt. Add constraints. Try a different approach. |
| Ignoring test failures | "It mostly works" → production incidents | Fix tests immediately. Green before moving on. |
| Never using /compact | Context degrades, Claude gets confused | Compact every 30-45 minutes of active work |
| Pasting entire codebases | Context full of noise | Reference files by path. Let Claude read what it needs. |
| Using Claude for tasks you should think through | Outsourcing architecture decisions to AI | Discuss with Claude, but YOU decide. |
| Not committing between tasks | Can't revert, can't bisect | Commit after every working state |
| Prompting in vague language | "Make it better" → random changes | Specific inputs, specific outputs, specific constraints |
| Fighting Claude's suggestions | If Claude keeps suggesting something different, maybe it's right | Consider the suggestion. Explain why your way is better if you disagree. |
| Command | When to Use |
|---------|------------|
| /new | New task, fresh context |
| /compact | Context getting heavy, mid-task |
| /clear | Nuclear option — wipe everything |
| /cost | Check token spend this session |
| /model | Switch models (Sonnet for speed, Opus for complexity) |
| /vim | Enter vim mode for file editing |
| Task Type | Best Model | Why | |-----------|-----------|-----| | Simple bug fix | Sonnet | Fast, cheap, sufficient | | New feature implementation | Sonnet | Good balance of speed + quality | | Complex architecture | Opus | Deeper reasoning, better tradeoff analysis | | Code review | Opus | Catches subtle issues | | Refactoring | Sonnet | Mechanical changes, speed matters | | Debugging race conditions | Opus | Needs to reason about state |
Esc → interrupt Claude (stop generation if going wrong direction)Up arrow → edit last prompt (fix typo without re-typing)Tab → accept file edit suggestionFor maximum throughput on a large feature:
/new)1. "Create branch feat/[name]"
2. "Write failing tests for [feature spec]"
3. "Implement minimum code to pass tests"
4. "Refactor — tests must stay green"
5. "Run full test suite + lint + typecheck"
6. "Commit with conventional commit message"
7. "Self-review: check diff for security, performance, missing edge cases"
8. "Create PR with description"
1. "Create branch fix/[description]"
2. "Write a test that reproduces this bug: [paste error]"
3. "Fix the bug — test must pass"
4. "Run full test suite to check for regressions"
5. "Commit: fix: [description of what was wrong]"
1. "Create branch refactor/[description]"
2. "Run tests — confirm all green"
3. "Commit pre-refactor state"
4. "[Specific refactoring instruction]"
5. "Run tests — must still be green"
6. "Commit this step"
7. [Repeat 4-6 for each refactoring step]
1. "Use Task tool to research [topic]. Return: key findings, API surface, gotchas, recommended approach."
2. [Read Task output]
3. "Based on the research, build a minimal proof of concept in /tmp/spike-[name]/"
4. [Evaluate POC]
5. "Spike looks good. Now implement properly in the main codebase."
Track these weekly:
| Metric | Target | How to Measure |
|--------|--------|----------------|
| Features shipped | 3-5/week | Git commits tagged feat: |
| Bugs introduced | <1/week | Post-deploy incidents |
| Test coverage trend | ↑ or stable | Coverage reports |
| Token cost / feature | Decreasing | /cost per session |
| Time to first working code | <30 min | Stopwatch from task start |
| Context compacts per session | 1-2 | Count your /compact usage |
| Say This | Does This | |----------|----------| | "Set up my project for Claude Code" | Creates CLAUDE.md + .claueignore from your stack | | "Review this code" | Runs 5-dimension review on changed files | | "Help me debug [error]" | Walks through DEBUG protocol | | "Refactor [file/module]" | Safe refactoring with test verification | | "Write tests for [function]" | TDD-style test generation | | "Ship this feature" | Runs production checklist | | "Start a new task" | Clean context + branch setup | | "How's my productivity?" | Reviews git log and suggests improvements | | "Optimize my CLAUDE.md" | Reviews and improves your project config | | "What model should I use for [task]?" | Model selection recommendation | | "Help me with my PR" | PR description + self-review | | "Estimate this task" | Breaks down into steps with time estimates |
Built by AfrexAI — AI-native business tools that ship.
Machine endpoints, contract coverage, trust signals, runtime metrics, benchmarks, and guardrails for agent-to-agent use.
Machine interfaces
Contract coverage
Status
missing
Auth
None
Streaming
No
Data region
Unspecified
Protocol support
Requires: none
Forbidden: none
Guardrails
Operational confidence: low
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/snapshot"
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/contract"
curl -s "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/trust"
Operational fit
Trust signals
Handshake
UNKNOWN
Confidence
unknown
Attempts 30d
unknown
Fallback rate
unknown
Runtime metrics
Observed P50
unknown
Observed P95
unknown
Rate limit
unknown
Estimated cost
unknown
Do not use if
Raw contract, invocation, trust, capability, facts, and change-event payloads for machine-side inspection.
Contract JSON
{
"contractStatus": "missing",
"authModes": [],
"requires": [],
"forbidden": [],
"supportsMcp": false,
"supportsA2a": false,
"supportsStreaming": false,
"inputSchemaRef": null,
"outputSchemaRef": null,
"dataRegion": null,
"contractUpdatedAt": null,
"sourceUpdatedAt": null,
"freshnessSeconds": null
}Invocation Guide
{
"preferredApi": {
"snapshotUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/snapshot",
"contractUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/contract",
"trustUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/trust"
},
"curlExamples": [
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/snapshot\"",
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/contract\"",
"curl -s \"https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/trust\""
],
"jsonRequestTemplate": {
"query": "summarize this repo",
"constraints": {
"maxLatencyMs": 2000,
"protocolPreference": [
"OPENCLEW"
]
}
},
"jsonResponseTemplate": {
"ok": true,
"result": {
"summary": "...",
"confidence": 0.9
},
"meta": {
"source": "CLAWHUB",
"generatedAt": "2026-04-17T00:03:44.532Z"
}
},
"retryPolicy": {
"maxAttempts": 3,
"backoffMs": [
500,
1500,
3500
],
"retryableConditions": [
"HTTP_429",
"HTTP_503",
"NETWORK_TIMEOUT"
]
}
}Trust JSON
{
"status": "unavailable",
"handshakeStatus": "UNKNOWN",
"verificationFreshnessHours": null,
"reputationScore": null,
"p95LatencyMs": null,
"successRate30d": null,
"fallbackRate": null,
"attempts30d": null,
"trustUpdatedAt": null,
"trustConfidence": "unknown",
"sourceUpdatedAt": null,
"freshnessSeconds": null
}Capability Matrix
{
"rows": [
{
"key": "OPENCLEW",
"type": "protocol",
"support": "unknown",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Listed on profile"
},
{
"key": "have",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
},
{
"key": "see",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
},
{
"key": "read",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
},
{
"key": "you",
"type": "capability",
"support": "supported",
"confidenceSource": "profile",
"notes": "Declared in agent profile metadata"
}
],
"flattenedTokens": "protocol:OPENCLEW|unknown|profile capability:have|supported|profile capability:see|supported|profile capability:read|supported|profile capability:you|supported|profile"
}Facts JSON
[
{
"factKey": "docs_crawl",
"category": "integration",
"label": "Crawlable docs",
"value": "6 indexed pages on the official domain",
"href": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceType": "search_document",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T05:03:46.393Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "vendor",
"category": "vendor",
"label": "Vendor",
"value": "Openclaw",
"href": "https://github.com/openclaw/skills/tree/main/skills/1kalin/afrexai-claude-code-production",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/openclaw/skills/tree/main/skills/1kalin/afrexai-claude-code-production",
"sourceType": "profile",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T00:45:39.800Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "protocols",
"category": "compatibility",
"label": "Protocol compatibility",
"value": "OpenClaw",
"href": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/contract",
"sourceUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/contract",
"sourceType": "contract",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T00:45:39.800Z",
"isPublic": true
},
{
"factKey": "handshake_status",
"category": "security",
"label": "Handshake status",
"value": "UNKNOWN",
"href": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/trust",
"sourceUrl": "https://xpersona.co/api/v1/agents/clawhub-skills-1kalin-afrexai-claude-code-production/trust",
"sourceType": "trust",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": null,
"isPublic": true
}
]Change Events JSON
[
{
"eventType": "docs_update",
"title": "Docs refreshed: Sign in to GitHub · GitHub",
"description": "Fresh crawlable documentation was indexed for the official domain.",
"href": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceUrl": "https://github.com/login?return_to=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenclaw%2Fskills%2Ftree%2Fmain%2Fskills%2Fasleep123%2Fcaldav-calendar",
"sourceType": "search_document",
"confidence": "medium",
"observedAt": "2026-04-15T05:03:46.393Z",
"isPublic": true
}
]Sponsored
Ads related to afrexai-claude-code-production and adjacent AI workflows.