跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开

code-examples-sync

Synchronize and verify code examples in documentation. Use when function signatures change, API interfaces update, imports shift, or documentation snippets become outdated and need correction.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

查看安装方法

包含的文件(3)

  • SKILL.md4.5 KB
  • CHANGELOG.md4.2 KB
  • LICENSE.txt1.0 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Code Example Synchronization

Use this skill when docs contain code snippets that are likely to drift from the real implementation.

  • Leverage native parallel subagent dispatch and 200k+ context windows where available.

Activation Conditions

Use symptom -> action triggers: when one matches, apply this skill and verify with the protocol below.

  • Function signatures changed
  • Imports or package names changed
  • Request or response contracts changed
  • Framework guidance or recommended patterns changed
  • A doc snippet compiles conceptually but no longer matches the codebase

Workflow

  1. Find the canonical implementation first.
  2. Update every affected snippet in docs, examples, and READMEs.
  3. Verify syntax, imports, and expected outputs.
  4. Note any intentional divergence, such as simplified tutorial snippets.

Anti-Patterns

  • Starting work before the plan or gate is clear: Execution drifts when success criteria are implied instead of explicit.
  • Treating verification as optional cleanup: The last mile is where regressions and missing updates are usually hiding.
  • Mixing planning, implementation, and release work in one jump: You lose the causal chain that explains why a change is safe.

Verification Protocol

Before claiming "skill applied successfully":

  1. Pass/fail: The Code Examples Sync workflow starts from explicit success criteria, constraints, and stop conditions.
  2. Pass/fail: Required evidence is collected before any completion, approval, or readiness claim.
  3. Pass/fail: The next action follows the documented gate order without skipping review or verification steps.
  4. Pressure-test scenario: Apply the workflow under time pressure with one failing check and one tempting shortcut.
  5. Success metric: Zero rationalizations; blocked, failed, or unverified work is reported as such.

Quality Checklist

  • Snippet matches current API shape
  • Imports and package names are current
  • Async, error handling, and setup steps still make sense
  • Output examples match current behavior
  • Duplicate snippets across docs were updated together

References & Resources

Documentation

Scripts

  • Example Sync Check - Audit Markdown files for untyped fences, placeholder text, and obviously stale examples
<!-- MCP:START --> <!-- PORTABILITY:START -->

Cross-Client Portability

This skill is written to stay usable across GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and Codex.

  • GitHub Copilot: keep the folder in a Copilot-visible skill path or wrap the workflow in project instructions when folder discovery is unavailable.
  • Claude Code: keep the folder in a local skills directory or a compatible plugin source.
  • Codex: install or sync the folder into $CODEX_HOME/skills/code-examples-sync and restart Codex after major changes.
<!-- PORTABILITY:END -->

MCP Availability And Fallback

Preferred MCP Server: None required

  • Fallback prompt: "Use the Code Example Synchronization skill without MCP. Rely on the local SKILL.md, bundled references or scripts, and manual verification. Show the exact commands, evidence, and final checks you used before concluding."
  • If the current host does not expose a matching server, use the bundled references, scripts, native toolchain, and manual workflow already described in this skill.
  • Treat direct local verification, rendered output, logs, tests, or screenshots as the fallback evidence path before completion.
<!-- MCP:END -->

Related Skills

  • development-workflow: Use it when the workflow also needs planning, quality gates, and delivery tracking.
  • code-quality: Use it when the workflow also needs two-stage review (spec compliance first, then code quality), maintainability, and refactoring guidance.
  • systematic-debugging: Use it when the workflow also needs root-cause debugging before proposing fixes.
  • test-driven-development: Use it when the workflow also needs test-first implementation and regression safety.

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

AI-powered adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector design for gene therapy including capsid engineering, promoter selection, and tropism optimization.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Improve the clarity and voice of AI-assisted academic writing (papers, theses, rebuttals) and

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

12-agent academic paper writing pipeline. 11 modes (full/plan/outline/revision/revision-coach/abstract/lit-review/format-convert/citation-check/disclosure/rebuttal-audit). 6 paper types, 5 citation formats, bilingual abstracts, LaTeX/DOCX-via-Pandoc/PDF output. Style Calibration + Writing Quality Check + Anti-Patterns with IRON RULE markers. Triggers: write paper, academic paper, guide my paper, parse reviews, audit my rebuttal, check my response draft, AI disclosure, 寫論文, 學術論文, 引導我寫論文, 審查意見, 評估回覆, 논문 작성, 초록 작성, 논문 수정, 논문 계획을 도와줘, 심사 의견 반영, 답변서 점검, AI 사용 고지.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Systematic writing framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers from optimized outline to submission-ready manuscript. Use when users want to: (1) write a paper from a detailed outline, (2) ensure quality control during writing, (3) maintain consistency across chapters, (4) prepare a submission-ready manuscript, or (5) systematically execute a planned paper. Triggered by phrases like 'write the paper from this outline,' 'compose the full manuscript,' 'execute the outline,' or when users have completed strategic planning (academic-paper-strategist skill) and are ready to write. Takes optimized outline as input; outputs complete manuscript with iterative quality checks.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Multi-perspective academic paper review with dynamic reviewer personas. Runs a 5-seat, role-separated review panel (Journal-Fit Reviewer + 3 peer-review roles + Devil's Advocate) with field-specific expertise; role separation is not a claim of independent error processes. Supports full review, re-review (verification), quick assessment, methodology focus, Socratic guided, and calibration modes. Triggers on: review paper, peer review, manuscript review, referee report, review my paper, critique paper, simulate review, editorial review, calibrate reviewer, reviewer calibration, measure reviewer accuracy, 審查論文, 論文審查, 模擬審查, 同儕審查, 幫我審這篇, 以審查人角度評估, 審查者校準, 논문 심사, 동료 심사, 모의 심사, 심사자 관점에서 평가, 심사자 보정.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

Systematic strategic planning framework for philosophy and interdisciplinary academic papers targeting preprint platforms (PhilArchive, arXiv, PhilSci-Archive). Use when users want to: (1) plan a paper on a specific topic, (2) identify research gaps and assess originality, (3) develop optimized paper outlines, (4) prepare for preprint submission, or (5) understand platform requirements and writing standards. Triggered by phrases like 'plan a paper on,' 'help me design a paper about,' 'identify research gaps in,' 'is this idea original,' or when users need structured research planning. The skill guides through three phases: Platform Analysis (identifying target venue and studying sample papers), Theoretical Framework (AI-driven literature search and gap identification), and Outline Optimization (structured design with reviewer-perspective self-assessment). Each phase includes quality evaluation standards and validation checkpoints.

中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。

bg-szy/TOP-SKILLS62026年9月8日 更新

查看 bg-szy 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题