功能描述

Judge whether an email is important/urgent using content-based analysis rather than sender name or mailbox labels (which can be spoofed). Use when asked to triage emails, decide priority, detect phishing/social-engineering, or recommend next actions (reply/pay/login/download/click) based on what the message asks the user to do.

使用说明 (SKILL.md)

Email Importance Content Analysis

Name: Email Importance Content Analysis
Author: shingo0620

Use a subject/title-first triage, then perform technical verification (headers/links/attachments) only when warranted, and only then validate with content analysis. Treat sender display name, badges, labels, and “From” appearance as untrusted.

Workflow (title → technical → content)

1) Title/subject + sender triage (cheap first-pass)

Use only: subject line + sender (display name + email address/domain as shown). Do not click anything.

Important: treat sender as weak signal (can be spoofed). Use it for triage only.

1A) Fast-drop rules (save time)

If the sender looks obviously sloppy/spoofed AND the email is not expected, classify as Likely scam/ads and stop (do not spend time on technical verification). Examples of fast-drop signals:

Display name claims a bank/government/major brand but the address is from a free mailbox (gmail/outlook/163/qq) or unrelated domain
Lookalike domains / typo-squatting: paypaI (I/l), micros0ft (0/O), extra -secure/-verify, weird punctuation
Suspicious TLDs or brand stuffed into subdomain: brand.security-check.example.com
Very unprofessional local-part patterns (random digits/strings) while claiming official identity
Pure promo patterns (promo/marketing/news) + obvious sales subject ⇒ treat as ads

1B) Escalate rules (to technical verification)

Escalate for technical verification if subject OR sender implies any of:

Money/settlement: 扣款/圈存/付款/退款/發票/帳單/對帳單/繳費
Account/security: 登入/驗證/密碼重設/異常登入/停權/封鎖/安全警告
Delivery/download: 文件下載/取件號碼/包裹/物流失敗
Urgency/threat: 最後通知/24小時內/立即/否則將…
Execution: 附件/請下載/請開啟/啟用巨集

If the subject is clearly marketing/newsletter and no action is implied ⇒ usually stop here (Low).

If it triggers the fast-drop rules, you may label it as:

Importance: Low
Risk: Medium–High (spoof attempt)
Next step: Do not click; optionally mark as spam/block

2) Technical verification (only for emails that passed title triage)

Prefer evaluating raw email headers / “Show original” output (or via gog gmail get). Check:

Authentication-Results: SPF / DKIM / DMARC results (pass|fail|neutral) and note which domain they authenticate
Alignment: whether DKIM d= domain / SPF MAIL FROM / DMARC aligns with the visible From domain
From vs Reply-To mismatch
Links and attachments:
- Expand the real target domain (hover/copy link) — don’t trust anchor text
- Note risky attachments (e.g., .zip, .iso, .js, .vbs, .docm, password-protected archives)

If headers are not available, mark Technical verdict = Unknown and increase caution.

3) Extract the actionable claims (facts only) — only if technical verification passes

From the email body, list:

What happened / what they claim happened
What they want the recipient to do (and by when)
What account/system/money is involved
What evidence they provide (order id, invoice id, ticket id, last-4 digits, timestamps)

4) Classify the required action (drives importance)

Rank higher if it requires any of:

Account access / authentication: login, password reset, 2FA codes, device approval
Money movement: payment, wire, subscription renewal, invoice settlement, refunds
Permissions / security posture: granting access, changing roles, API keys, OAuth consent
Software execution: download/open an attachment, run a file, enable macros
Data disclosure: personal/company info, documents, ID numbers

5) Content risk patterns (red flags)

Increase risk if the content shows:

Urgency / threat: “within 24h”, “account will be closed”, “legal action”, “final notice”
Secrecy / bypass: “don’t tell others”, “use personal email”, “avoid normal process”
Mismatch / vagueness: generic greeting, unclear context, missing specifics the real sender would know
Odd requests: asking for OTP, gift cards, crypto, remote access, or direct bank changes
Link/attachment pressure: “click to verify”, “download to view”, “enable macros”

6) Choose safe verification (do not trust the email path)

Even if SPF/DKIM/DMARC pass, for sensitive actions recommend out-of-band verification:

Navigate via known official entry points (typed URL, app, bookmark), not email links
If it claims an account issue: check account status by logging in from official site/app
If it’s a vendor/payment issue: verify using the invoice/order id inside the official portal
If it’s workplace related: verify via internal chat/phone using known contacts

7) Output: priority + next action

Always provide:

Title triage verdict: Escalate / Ignore
Technical verdict: Pass / Fail / Unknown
Importance level: Critical / High / Medium / Low
Risk level: High (likely phishing) / Medium / Low
Recommended next step: what to do now, what not to do, and how to verify

Decision Heuristics (quick)

Technical FAIL (SPF/DKIM/DMARC fail or obvious mismatch) + any call-to-action ⇒ Risk: High (treat as phishing) regardless of “importance”.
Critical: money/credentials/permissions + urgency OR any request for OTP/macro/remote access.
High: requires action soon, could cause loss of access/service interruption, but can be verified safely via official channels.
Medium: informational but relevant; no immediate sensitive action.
Low: newsletters, marketing, generic updates with no action.

Response Template (use in replies)

Title triage (why it escalates / why it can be ignored):
Technical verification (SPF/DKIM/DMARC + alignment + From/Reply-To + link/attachment notes):
Summary (1–2 lines):
What it’s asking you to do:
Why it may matter (impact if ignored):
Red flags (if any):
Safe verification path:
Recommendation (do / don’t):

安全使用建议

This skill is a set of safe, sensible triage instructions and appears coherent. Before installing/use: (1) Confirm whether you want manual use (paste an email for analysis) or automated access — automated fetching would require mailbox credentials, which this skill does not declare. (2) Never supply broad OAuth tokens or mailbox credentials unless you trust the skill owner and understand exactly what will be accessed. (3) Test the skill on non-sensitive emails first. (4) Ask the publisher to clarify what 'gog `gmail get`' refers to and whether any automation would attempt to access your mailbox or send data to external services.

功能分析

Type: OpenClaw Skill Name: email-importance-content-analysis Version: 1.0.1 The skill is designed for email security analysis, which is a benign purpose. However, the `SKILL.md` document instructs the agent to use `gog gmail get` for technical verification. This implies the agent may execute shell commands, which introduces a potential vulnerability for shell injection if the agent's execution environment is not properly sandboxed or if inputs (e.g., from email content) are not sanitized before command execution. While the intent is not malicious, this capability is a high-risk behavior.

能力评估

✓ Purpose & Capability

The name/description match the SKILL.md: it explains subject-first triage, when to do technical checks (SPF/DKIM/DMARC/links/attachments), content analysis, and recommended next steps. The skill does not ask for unrelated credentials or system access that would be inconsistent with email triage.

ℹ Instruction Scope

Instructions stay within email-triage scope (subject/sender check, optional header inspection, link/attachment caution, out-of-band verification). They do not direct the agent to read unrelated files, environment variables, or to transmit data to arbitrary endpoints. Minor ambiguity: SKILL.md mentions obtaining raw headers via mailbox UI or via 'gog `gmail get`' — if an automation used that command it would require mailbox API access, but the skill does not declare or request such credentials.

✓ Install Mechanism

No install spec and no code files — instruction-only skills have minimal install risk and nothing is written to disk or downloaded.

ℹ Credentials

The skill declares no required environment variables or credentials, which is proportionate for a guidelines-only skill. Be aware: fully automated execution that fetches headers or emails would require mailbox credentials (OAuth/API tokens), but those are not requested here — so automated fetching is not supported by the skill as-declared.

✓ Persistence & Privilege

always is false and the skill does not request persistent agent configuration or elevated platform privileges. Default autonomous invocation (disable-model-invocation=false) is normal and not problematic by itself.

版本历史

v1.0.1

1.0.1: Add fast-drop rules + clarify subject+sender triage before SPF/DKIM/DMARC; content analysis only after technical pass.

v1.0.0

Initial release: subject+sender triage → technical verification (SPF/DKIM/DMARC) → content analysis.

元数据

Slug email-importance-content-analysis

版本 1.0.1

许可证 —

累计安装 0

当前安装数 0

历史版本数 2

常见问题