analyze
免费Risk analysis and approach selection before planning. Use when requirements are ambiguous, approaches vary, or work touches hub/bridge nodes. Skip for typo fixes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Proactive architecture review — explore codebase structure, generate a self-contained HTML report with Mermaid diagrams and candidate improvements, then grill the findings. Use when planning a large refactor, onboarding to an unfamiliar codebase, or before a major architectural change.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Three phases: explore → HTML report → grilling loop.
Announce: "🏛️ /supergraph:architecture — mapping codebase structure..."
1a. Read CONTEXT.md:
cat CONTEXT.md 2>/dev/null || echo "No CONTEXT.md"
1b. Codebase Memory overview (optional):
Use CBM_PROJECT with get_architecture aspects overview, layers,
boundaries, clusters, and hotspots. After get_graph_schema, run shared
contract recipes hubs, bridges, cross-boundary, and test-gaps.
If codebase-memory-mcp is unavailable, label graph evidence unavailable, use
Serena/filesystem evidence, and generate Mermaid diagrams from imports.
1c. Serena structure (optional):
mcp__serena__get_symbols_overview()
1d. Read 3-5 hub node files — understand actual structure, naming, patterns.
Write self-contained docs/supergraph/architecture-review-<YYYY-MM-DD>.html with Tailwind+Mermaid header, architecture graph TD, per-candidate card (Problem/Proposal/Before/After Mermaid/Impact/Trade-offs with badge Strong/Worth exploring/Speculative), plus tables for Test Gaps and Unexpected Coupling.
Open: open docs/supergraph/architecture-review-<date>.html || xdg-open ... || echo "Report saved: ..."
For each Strong candidate, ask one focused question:
"Candidate N proposes [X]. Is this consistent with [constraint from CONTEXT.md / known business rule]?"
Incorporate answers to refine the candidate cards. Mark dismissed candidates as Rejected — [reason].
After grilling, present final prioritized list:
Strong candidates (ready for /supergraph:plan):
1. [Name] — [one-line rationale]
Worth exploring (needs spike first):
2. [Name] — [open question to resolve]
Speculative (park for later):
3. [Name] — [what would need to be true]
✅ /supergraph:architecture complete
- Report: docs/supergraph/architecture-review-<date>.html
- Communities: N | Hub nodes: N | Bridge nodes: N
- Candidates: N Strong, N Worth exploring, N Speculative
- Next: /supergraph:plan (for Strong candidates) or /supergraph:prototype (for uncertain ones)
printf '\n## <invariant>\n[description]\n' >> CONTEXT.md
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
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。
Risk analysis and approach selection before planning. Use when requirements are ambiguous, approaches vary, or work touches hub/bridge nodes. Skip for typo fixes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Autonomous human-like browser control and professional QA/QC testing. Powered by agent-browser (Rust native CDP, zero Playwright) with ISTQB test matrix generation, automated testcase execution, console/network error tracing, and defect reporting.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Persistent token-compression mode (~75% reduction) — now always-on by default. Strips filler while keeping code exact.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Database migration best practices for schema changes, data migrations, rollbacks, and zero-downtime deployments across PostgreSQL, MySQL, and common ORMs (Prisma, Drizzle, Kysely, Django, TypeORM, golang-migrate).
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Anti-slop frontend skill for landing pages, portfolios, and redesigns. The agent reads the brief, infers the right design direction, and ships interfaces that do not look templated. Real design systems when applicable, audit-first on redesigns, strict pre-flight check.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Structured 6-phase debugging. Build feedback loop first, reproduce deterministically, hypothesize with ranked falsifiable theories, instrument one variable at a time, fix with regression test, cleanup. Use when a bug exists, tests fail unexpectedly, or behavior is wrong and cause is unknown.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。