跳到正文
cccskills
免费在 GitHub 公开中文介绍

create-runner-adapter

为native Paperclip Runner接入新的执行工具或提供商,从需求整理、通信协议调查到实现、打包,以及在实际环境中验证完整流程。

原文查看原文说明

Add a new harness/provider integration to native Paperclip Runner, from requirements and protocol research through implementation, packaging, and real end-to-end acceptance. Use for new Runner adapters; legacy direct adapter authoring and migration are outside this skill.

AI 评分90分/ 100查看安装方法

适用场景

  • 为Runner新增连接
  • 调查执行工具的通信协议和能力
  • 验证连接的取消与恢复
  • 在目标环境检查分发包

中文介绍

功能

为native Paperclip Runner添加适配器,连接新的代理执行工具或提供商。整理目标环境、认证、必要能力和费用上限,并通过官方资料及实际通信调查规格。除实现外,还涵盖分发包检查,以及从界面经过Runner到提供商的完整流程验证。

适用场景

适合希望新增连接,并确认其可用于真实任务的开发者。检查指定模型和指令是否正确传达,也验证请求人工决策的处理、取消、恢复以及执行结束后的清理。通过有针对性的测试,确认对现有连接方式的影响。

使用示例

  • “把这个提供商接入native Paperclip Runner。”
  • “整理支持的环境和认证方式,完成实现,并用真实任务进行验收。”

注意事项

目标代码检出目录必须包含packages/paperclip-runner和tests/runner-e2e。详细判断标准使用随附的操作手册和模板。实际连接验证需要相应账户或认证配置。此技能不涵盖新建旧式direct adapter,也不涵盖代理迁移。

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良好明确以新增native Runner连接为目标,并排除旧式适配器编写和迁移。
步骤具体性步骤、输入输出和示例是否具体
A良好七个步骤对应操作手册章节,并规定真实任务、分发包及清理的验证要求。
安全性发送数据、删除文件、执行命令等是否有说明
A良好步骤包含费用上限、凭据使用范围,以及取消和清理的实际验证。
安装难易度所需工具和 API 密钥是否少且有说明
B部分不足明确列出所需目录和参考资料,但未提供各提供商的认证配置方法。

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20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(1)

  • SKILL.md5.6 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。

Add a native Runner adapter

Use this skill to add a harness to the new, native Paperclip Runner execution system. Here, adapter means the provider translation and launch integration behind a Runner harness driver. Preserve existing direct adapters and historical records as compatibility constraints; do not route this work through their package-authoring recipe or migrate agents as a side effect.

The complete procedure is the Runner integration playbook. Use its working templates for the release contract, capability inventory, acceptance ledger, and failure record. These repository files contain the decision rules and test criteria themselves. No private chat, task, prior campaign, or separate private repository is required. Source links identify code to inspect, not evidence that a new integration passed.

If this skill was installed separately, locate the target checkout from the current workspace or git rev-parse --show-toplevel. Verify it contains packages/paperclip-runner and tests/runner-e2e; resolve doc/ paths there. Follow that checkout's AGENTS.md and scoped rules before editing.

Work sequence

  1. Define a finite release. Read playbook sections 1–3. Record the user outcome, first environment, supported platforms, setup/auth, required capabilities, selected acceptance model, spending limits, and delivery target. Keep the complete capability inventory separate from the release requirements.
  2. Investigate the actual harness. Use section 4. Inspect versioned official docs, native source or shipped code, real protocol traffic, and account/model behavior. Track every capability through native harness, wrapper, Runner, controller, and UI. Distinguish documented, observed, and qualified support.
  3. Prove one complete slice. Use sections 5–7. Establish exact model and instruction admission, scoped tools and credentials, then complete one real Paperclip task with independently verified output and physical cleanup. Exercise ordinary connect/save/reopen/Test/reconnect in the selected environment; check database constraints and account/model routing as well as driver execution.
  4. Complete the promised behavior. Use sections 8–10. Preserve rich events, durable human decisions, callback identity, recovery, cancellation, and terminal settlement. Keep provider-specific semantics in provider code.
  5. Prove delivery. Use section 11. Exercise clean installed packages and the agreed execution environment; verify the complete runtime closure and immutable image identity. A source checkout or startup probe is insufficient delivery proof.
  6. Qualify the release. Use sections 12–15. Begin with deterministic and real dependency checks, then run exact Product E2E cells through browser/server/DB/ Runner/provider. Section 12 includes a repository-contained test-authoring path. Freeze the candidate and retain original failures, cost coverage, and cleanup.
  7. Hand off an operable result. Use section 16 and the templates. Account for repository checks, exact passing evidence, remaining limits, installation, operation, and rollback. Keep merge, publish, deploy, and canary claims distinct.

Rules that must survive implementation pressure

  • A qualification model is a repeatable test choice, not a product allowlist. Verify the caller's exact model at the native boundary before the first prompt.
  • Instruction transport success is insufficient: bind exact content on create and load, reject missing acknowledgments, and verify resulting behavior.
  • A native question, semantic question, plan, and permission request are distinct contracts. Preserve identity and prove delivery; queued does not mean answered.
  • Same conversation does not establish same process or recoverable pending input. Stop must reach the owned native work and prevent late callbacks from reviving it.
  • A screenshot, model-authored success claim, or green unit suite cannot replace independent file/artifact/state/cleanup checks through the promised user path.
  • Diagnose the first divergence across arguments, transport, files, persistence, and grader before another paid attempt. Preserve the original grade.
  • Changes after a pass require an evidence-impact decision. Old results retain their original runtime, model, environment, and fixture identity.
  • Prove spontaneous native-child loss and bounded shutdown, not only cleanup invoked by a test. Preserve durable expiry for each supported request kind.
  • Establish the concurrency being graded: attached work must overlap finish; a Stop case must reach real pending work before its observation window closes.
  • Keep campaign evidence, budget history, and candidate/publication state durable across interruptions. Reconcile shipping dependencies before final qualification.
  • Preserve legacy behavior through focused regression checks. Legacy authoring, runtime conversion, and migration are not part of adding a native integration.

Keep new guidance shareable: put the complete lesson and reproducible acceptance condition in tracked documentation. Do not substitute personal session links, private task URLs, inaccessible evidence archives, or workstation-specific paths.

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

add-product-e2e-eval

免费有简介AI 评分 90分

为Paperclip新增或扩展贯穿真实浏览器、服务器、数据库和runner的端到端评估,整理测试数据、判定条件与证据,并在现有报告中查看操作结果。

  • 新增完整用户操作流程的评估
  • 更新测试数据与判定条件
  • 在评估报告中加入截图和产物
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

add-runner-eval

免费有简介AI 评分 90分

为Paperclip Runner添加或扩展行为评估,定义判定条件、执行目标和报告验证数据,利用正常及异常证据验证结果,并保留执行记录与费用。

  • 添加Runner行为评估
  • 用有效与无效证据检验判定
  • 更新执行列表和持续评估
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

agent-browser

免费有简介AI 评分 90分

通过实际浏览器操作网页和应用,检查界面显示与运行情况。结合截图、简单表单填写、错误及网络请求记录,帮助复现问题并确认操作结果。

  • 检查界面修改后的显示效果
  • 读取由JavaScript渲染的内容
  • 复现界面问题并记录错误
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

agentmail

免费有简介AI 评分 100分

通过 Paperclip 分配的 AgentMail 收件箱,查看任务关联邮件、发送新邮件或回复,并核查投递结果;重试时保留相同标识,避免重复发送。

  • 查看所负责任务关联的邮件
  • 从分配的收件箱发送新邮件
  • 回复会话中的指定邮件
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

check-pr

免费有简介AI 评分 80分

检查GitHub、GitLab和Perforce变更中的评审意见、自动检查失败及说明缺漏,整理待办事项,并按请求协助修改和解决已处理的讨论。

  • 提交变更前进行检查
  • 确认失败的检查和待修改项
  • 整理人工及机器人评审意见
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

company-creator

免费有简介AI 评分 100分

根据构想或现有代码仓库,梳理AI智能体的职责、汇报关系与工作交接,生成符合规范的公司或团队文件包,供组织协作和导入Paperclip使用。

  • 从构想建立智能体公司
  • 将代码仓库整理为团队
  • 设计职责分工与工作交接
paperclipai/paperclip10.5万2026年10月20日 更新

查看 paperclipai 的全部技能

报告此技能的问题