根据任务的规模和阶段,指导你选择相关技能及其使用顺序,涵盖想法梳理、实现和故障排查,帮助确定下一步以及如何衔接后续工作。
- 选择从想法到实现的步骤
- 确定故障排查的起点
- 规划分多次会话完成的开发
将一次对话无法完成的大型计划或变更整理成待决问题及其依赖关系,在问题跟踪工具中保存决策依据,明确进入执行前需要走通的路径。
Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
wayfinder 将一次智能体对话容纳不下的工作,整理成需要作出决定的问题地图。先确定目标,再在问题跟踪工具中创建总览地图及其下属决策工单。它连接问题之间的依赖关系,从可以着手的问题开始解决。决策细节保存在各工单中,地图只记录要点和链接,同时区分尚无法具体提出问题的领域与本次范围之外的工作。
适合大型变更、课程制作等尚未明确推进路径的项目。它让参与者在多次对话之间共享决策经过,并通过研究、原型制作和与使用者讨论,逐步找出接下来需要回答的问题。
原则上用于规划,成果的具体实施属于另一项工作。未指定问题跟踪工具时,使用本地 Markdown 方式。根据问题类型使用 research、prototype、grilling 和 domain-modeling。通常每次对话解决一个工单,研究工单例外,可并行处理。
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。
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。
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。
安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
A loose idea has arrived, too big for one agent session, and wrapped in fog: the way from here to the destination isn't visible yet. Wayfinding is about finding that way, not charging at the destination. This skill charts the way as a shared map on the repo's issue tracker, then works its decision tickets (questions whose resolution is a decision, not slices of a build to execute) one at a time until the route is clear.
The destination varies per effort, and naming it is the first act of charting: it shapes every ticket. It might be a spec to hand off and iterate on, a decision to lock before planning starts, or a change made in place like a data-structure migration. The map is domain-agnostic: engineering work, course content, whatever fits the shape.
Wayfinder is planning by default: each ticket resolves a decision, and the map is done when the way is clear, with nothing left to decide before someone goes and does the thing. The pull to just do the work is usually the signal you've reached the edge of the map and it's time to hand off. An effort can override this in its Notes, carrying execution into the map itself, but absent that, produce decisions, not deliverables.
Every map and ticket is an issue, so it has a name: its title. In everything the human reads (narration, the map's Decisions-so-far), refer to it by that name, never by a bare id, number, or slug. A wall of #42, #43, #44 is illegible; names read at a glance. The id and URL don't vanish; a name wraps its link, but they ride inside the name, never stand in for it.
The map is a single issue on this repo's issue tracker, labelled wayfinder:map, the canonical artifact. Its tickets are child issues of the map.
The map is an index, not a store. It lists the decisions made and points at the tickets that hold their detail; a decision lives in exactly one place, its ticket, so the map never restates it, only gists it and links.
Where the map, its child tickets, blocking, and frontier queries physically live is tracker-specific. The issue tracker should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run /setup-matt-pocock-skills. Consult the tracker doc's "Wayfinding operations" section for how this repo expresses them. If no tracker has been provided, default to the local-markdown tracker.
The whole map at low resolution, loaded once per session. Open tickets are not listed: they are open child issues, found by query.
## Destination
<what reaching the end of this map looks like: the spec, decision, or change this effort is finding its way to. One or two lines; every session orients to it before choosing a ticket.>
## Notes
<domain; skills every session should consult; standing preferences for this effort>
## Decisions so far
<!-- the index: one line per closed ticket, enough to judge relevance, then zoom the link for the detail the ticket holds -->
- [<closed ticket title>](link): <one-line gist of the answer>
## Not yet specified
<!-- see "Fog of war": in-scope fog you can't ticket yet; graduates as the frontier advances -->
## Out of scope
<!-- see "Out of scope": work ruled beyond the destination; closed, never graduates -->
Each ticket is a child issue of the map; the tracker's issue id is its identity. Its body is the question, sized to one 100K token agent session:
## Question
<the decision or investigation this ticket resolves>
Each ticket carries a wayfinder:<type> label, one of research, prototype, grilling, task (see Ticket Types). wayfinder: labels are the only labels a map and its tickets carry, never a triage label like ready-for-agent: they are decisions, not implementation work.
A session claims a ticket by assigning it to the dev driving the map, first, before any work, so concurrent sessions skip it. That assignee is the claim: an open, unassigned ticket is unclaimed.
Blocking uses the tracker's native dependency relationship: essential because it renders the frontier visually in the tracker's own UI, so the human sees what's takeable without opening the map. Only a tracker that lacks native blocking falls back to a body convention. A ticket is unblocked when every ticket blocking it is closed; the frontier is the open, unblocked, unclaimed children, the edge of the known.
The answer isn't part of the body; it's recorded on resolution (see Work through the map). Assets created while resolving a ticket are linked from the issue, not pasted in.
Every ticket is either HITL (human in the loop, worked with a human who speaks for themselves) or AFK, driven by the agent alone. A HITL ticket only resolves through that live exchange; the agent never stands in for the human's side of it (a grilling agent that answers its own questions has broken this).
The map is deliberately incomplete: don't chart what you can't yet see. Beyond the live tickets lies the fog of war: the dim view of decisions and investigations you can tell are coming but can't yet pin down, because they hang on questions still open. Resolving a ticket clears the fog ahead of it, graduating whatever's now specifiable into fresh tickets, one at a time, until the way to the destination is clear and no tickets remain.
The map's Not yet specified section is where that dim view is written down: the suspected question, the area to revisit later. It's the undiscovered frontier toward the destination: everything here is in scope, just not sharp enough to ticket. Write as loosely or as fully as the view allows; it doubles as a signpost for collaborators reading where the effort is headed.
Fog or ticket? The test is whether you can state the question precisely now, not whether you can answer it now.
Not yet specified excludes what's already decided (Decisions so far), what's already a live ticket, and what's out of scope (the next section).
Fog only ever gathers toward the destination. The destination fixes the scope, so work beyond it is out of scope: it isn't fog, and it doesn't belong in Not yet specified. It gets its own Out of scope section on the map: work you've consciously ruled out of this effort. Scope, not sharpness, lands it here.
Out-of-scope work never graduates (the frontier stops at the destination), so it returns only if the destination is redrawn, and then as a fresh effort, not a resumption.
Ruling something out of scope is a scoping act, not a step on the route. When a ticket that already exists turns out to sit past the destination (mis-scoped in while charting, or exposed by a resolution), close it (a closed ticket is unambiguously off the frontier) and leave one line in the Out of scope section: the gist plus why it's out of scope, linking the closed ticket. It stays out of Decisions so far, which records the route actually walked; a scope boundary isn't a step on it.
Two modes. Either way, never resolve more than one ticket per session, with the exception of research tickets.
User invokes with a loose idea.
wayfinder:map): Destination and Notes filled in, Decisions-so-far empty, the fog sketched into Not yet specified.#<n> auto-links to an unrelated issue. Wiring sorts them into the frontier and the blocked; everything you can't yet specify stays in the fog: the Not yet specified section.research ticket you just created, spin up a subagent that calls the Skill tool with "research" to resolve it in parallel, capturing its findings on a throwaway research/<name> branch with a context pointer from the ticket. Push the branch but open no PR: it is never merged.User invokes with a map (URL or number). A ticket is optional: without one, you pick the next decision, not the user.
wayfinder:<type> label names (see Ticket Types). Read the label, not just the body: the body never states the type. Zoom as needed: fetch the full body of any related or closed ticket on demand; call the Skill tool for whichever skills the ## Notes block names. If in doubt, call the Skill tool twice, for "grilling" and "domain-modeling".The user may run unblocked tickets in parallel, so expect other sessions to be editing the tracker concurrently.
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。
根据任务的规模和阶段,指导你选择相关技能及其使用顺序,涵盖想法梳理、实现和故障排查,帮助确定下一步以及如何衔接后续工作。
在单次会话中协调承担不同任务的子智能体,推进长期目标。后台工作与用户对话同时进行,并改进共享规范、工作环境和后续任务所需的信息访问条件。
将进行中的对话整理为交接摘要,移除敏感信息,明确后续重点、参考资料和建议技能,再启动新的后台智能体,从当前工作目录继续处理任务。
以指定提交、分支或标签为基准,从开发规范和原始需求两个角度审查代码变更。分别报告规范问题与需求缺漏,便于独立判断两方面的结果。
帮助设计用法精简、内部集中处理复杂逻辑的模块。通过统一术语和判断标准,评估模块是否易用、实现替换位置是否合适,以及是否便于测试。
通过能检测具体症状的测试或脚本,调查难以复现的故障和性能下降。缩小失败条件,验证多个原因假设,完成修复后检查原始复现流程及防止复发的测试。