跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开中文介绍

agent-sort

依据项目代码和配置选择ECC组件,将技能、规则、命令和钩子分为每次加载与按需查阅两类,形成附有依据的安装计划,并验证应用后的结果。

原文查看原文说明

Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle.

AI 评分90分/ 100查看安装方法

适用场景

  • 选择项目所需的ECC组件
  • 区分常用功能与参考资料
  • 检查过时规则和不兼容钩子
  • 分享附有代码依据的安装方案

中文介绍

功能

根据项目的实际代码和配置,选择所需的ECC组件并制定安装计划。检查使用的语言、框架、依赖项、测试和CI配置,对技能、命令、规则、钩子等进行分类。组件分为每次会话加载的DAILY和需要时搜索、查阅的LIBRARY,每项判断都附有依据和理由。

适用场景

适合完整加载ECC后出现大量无关信息的项目,也适合清理仍在生效、但与当前语言不符的规则。团队需要反复核对安装方案的依据时也可使用。必要时创建用于查阅的skill-library,并在计划应用后检查文件位置和钩子兼容性。

使用示例

  • “根据代码中的证据,选择这个项目需要的ECC组件。”
  • “区分每次都要加载的技能和只需按需查阅的技能。”
  • “检查是否还存在过时的语言规则或不兼容的钩子。”

注意事项

运行环境必须能够读取目标项目的文件和配置。LIBRARY表示保留为可访问的参考内容,并不表示删除。如果项目已有选择性安装方式,会更新现有方案。许可证为MIT。

本介绍由 AI(OpenAI Codex)根据公开的 SKILL.md 撰写。准确的规格请查看下方原文。

客观评估

AI 仅根据 SKILL.md 的内容,从 4 个方面进行了评估。星标数和热度不计入评估。

指令清晰度能否看出何时使用、做什么
A良好明确说明根据项目证据将组件分为DAILY和LIBRARY的目标。
步骤具体性步骤、输入输出和示例是否具体
A良好列出六步流程、证据表示例、安装位置和验证报告格式。
安全性发送数据、删除文件、执行命令等是否有说明
B部分不足涉及规则和钩子的安装、移除计划,但未说明变更前的确认步骤。
安装难易度所需工具和 API 密钥是否少且有说明
A良好主要前提是能访问代码仓库,并提供用于检查的rg和cat示例。

总分按每项 A=25 分、B=15 分、C=5 分相加。 由 AI(OpenAI Codex)于 2026年10月19日 评估。仅供参考,安装前请同时查看原文。

如果您认为评估有误,请申请复核

请写明哪一项有误以及原因。无需登录。我们会对照 SKILL.md 重新评估,并在此处更新结果。

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

包含的文件(2)

  • SKILL.md5.8 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml249 B

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Agent Sort

Use this skill when a repo needs a project-specific ECC surface instead of the default full install.

The goal is not to guess what "feels useful." The goal is to classify ECC components with evidence from the actual codebase.

When to Use

  • A project only needs a subset of ECC and full installs are too noisy
  • The repo stack is clear, but nobody wants to hand-curate skills one by one
  • A team wants a repeatable install decision backed by grep evidence instead of opinion
  • You need to separate always-loaded daily workflow surfaces from searchable library/reference surfaces
  • A repo has drifted into the wrong language, rule, or hook set and needs cleanup

Non-Negotiable Rules

  • Use the current repository as the source of truth, not generic preferences
  • Every DAILY decision must cite concrete repo evidence
  • LIBRARY does not mean "delete"; it means "keep accessible without loading by default"
  • Do not install hooks, rules, or scripts that the current repo cannot use
  • Prefer ECC-native surfaces; do not introduce a second install system

Outputs

Produce these artifacts in order:

  1. DAILY inventory
  2. LIBRARY inventory
  3. install plan
  4. verification report
  5. optional skill-library router if the project wants one

Classification Model

Use two buckets only:

  • DAILY
    • should load every session for this repo
    • strongly matched to the repo's language, framework, workflow, or operator surface
  • LIBRARY
    • useful to retain, but not worth loading by default
    • should remain reachable through search, router skill, or selective manual use

Evidence Sources

Use repo-local evidence before making any classification:

  • file extensions
  • package managers and lockfiles
  • framework configs
  • CI and hook configs
  • build/test scripts
  • imports and dependency manifests
  • repo docs that explicitly describe the stack

Useful commands include:

rg --files
rg -n "typescript|react|next|supabase|django|spring|flutter|swift"
cat package.json
cat pyproject.toml
cat Cargo.toml
cat pubspec.yaml
cat go.mod

Parallel Review Passes

If parallel subagents are available, split the review into these passes:

  1. Agents
    • classify agents/*
  2. Skills
    • classify skills/*
  3. Commands
    • classify commands/*
  4. Rules
    • classify rules/*
  5. Hooks and scripts
    • classify hook surfaces, MCP health checks, helper scripts, and OS compatibility
  6. Extras
    • classify contexts, examples, MCP configs, templates, and guidance docs

If subagents are not available, run the same passes sequentially.

Core Workflow

1. Read the repo

Establish the real stack before classifying anything:

  • languages in use
  • frameworks in use
  • primary package manager
  • test stack
  • lint/format stack
  • deployment/runtime surface
  • operator integrations already present

2. Build the evidence table

For every candidate surface, record:

  • component path
  • component type
  • proposed bucket
  • repo evidence
  • short justification

Use this format:

skills/frontend-patterns | skill | DAILY | 84 .tsx files, next.config.ts present | core frontend stack
skills/django-patterns   | skill | LIBRARY | no .py files, no pyproject.toml       | not active in this repo
rules/typescript/*       | rules | DAILY | package.json + tsconfig.json            | active TS repo
rules/python/*           | rules | LIBRARY | zero Python source files             | keep accessible only

3. Decide DAILY vs LIBRARY

Promote to DAILY when:

  • the repo clearly uses the matching stack
  • the component is general enough to help every session
  • the repo already depends on the corresponding runtime or workflow

Demote to LIBRARY when:

  • the component is off-stack
  • the repo might need it later, but not every day
  • it adds context overhead without immediate relevance

4. Build the install plan

Translate the classification into action:

  • DAILY skills -> install or keep in .claude/skills/
  • DAILY commands -> keep as explicit shims only if still useful
  • DAILY rules -> install only matching language sets
  • DAILY hooks/scripts -> keep only compatible ones
  • LIBRARY surfaces -> keep accessible through search or skill-library

If the repo already uses selective installs, update that plan instead of creating another system.

5. Create the optional library router

If the project wants a searchable library surface, create:

  • .claude/skills/skill-library/SKILL.md

That router should contain:

  • a short explanation of DAILY vs LIBRARY
  • grouped trigger keywords
  • where the library references live

Do not duplicate every skill body inside the router.

6. Verify the result

After the plan is applied, verify:

  • every DAILY file exists where expected
  • stale language rules were not left active
  • incompatible hooks were not installed
  • the resulting install actually matches the repo stack

Return a compact report with:

  • DAILY count
  • LIBRARY count
  • removed stale surfaces
  • open questions

Handoffs

If the next step is interactive installation or repair, hand off to:

  • configure-ecc

If the next step is overlap cleanup or catalog review, hand off to:

  • skill-stocktake

If the next step is broader context trimming, hand off to:

  • strategic-compact

Output Format

Return the result in this order:

STACK
- language/framework/runtime summary

DAILY
- always-loaded items with evidence

LIBRARY
- searchable/reference items with evidence

INSTALL PLAN
- what should be installed, removed, or routed

VERIFICATION
- checks run and remaining gaps

评价

还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。

评论

无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。

还没有评论。来写第一条吧。

提交后会立即公开。请勿填写邮箱、电话等个人信息。URL 最多 2 个。

0 / 1000 字

此表单受 reCAPTCHA 保护,适用 Google 的隐私权政策和服务条款。

同一仓库的技能

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月16日 更新

agent-architecture-audit

免费有简介AI 评分 80分

从指令、记忆、工具执行和界面显示等十二个层面排查人工智能代理故障,依据代码和日志梳理原因,按严重程度列出问题并提出修复方案。

  • 排查仅在应用内出现的故障
  • 调查旧对话混入回答的原因
  • 核对工具漏执行或虚报执行
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月16日 更新

agent-eval

免费有简介AI 评分 80分

用实际开发任务比较多个编程智能体,记录成功率、可获取的API费用、耗时和重复运行的稳定性,为工具选型及更新后的性能评估提供数据。

  • 用实际开发任务比较智能体
  • 采用新工具或模型前进行评估
  • 检查智能体更新后的性能
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月16日 更新

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示英语简介。

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月16日 更新

agent-introspection-debugging

免费有简介AI 评分 100分

根据错误信息和执行环境,分析AI代理反复失败或重复操作的原因。通过小范围、可撤销的恢复操作检验假设,并将结果与依据整理成可供交接的报告。

  • 诊断代理连续失败
  • 调查重复调用工具的循环
  • 检查上下文积累导致的输出退化
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月5日 更新

agent-introspection-debugging

免费有简介AI 评分 100分

在AI代理反复失败或重复操作时,记录错误与环境前提、排查原因,采取影响有限的恢复操作,并汇总结果和证据,为有依据的重试与交接提供支持。

  • 排查重复调用工具的原因
  • 调查对话膨胀导致的质量下降
  • 核对文件路径与环境差异
affaan-m/ECC28.4万2026年10月16日 更新

查看 affaan-m 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题