[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6ADZEZ328JHKB6VRW1CC3J4":3,"skill-same:01M6ADZEZ328JHKB6VRW1CC3J4":78},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":23,"publishedAt":35,"linkOnly":36,"markdownContent":37,"markdownBody":38,"frontMatter":39,"refName":40,"commitSha":41,"skillDirectory":42,"forksCount":43,"repositoryHtmlUrl":44,"repositoryHomepageUrl":45,"ownerHtmlUrl":46,"ownerBlogUrl":47,"ownerDescription":48,"updatedAt":49,"install":50,"resources":63},"01M6ADZEZ328JHKB6VRW1CC3J4","subagent-driven-development",null,"Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session","davila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates","davila7","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F6216945?v=4","01M6ADEWWFPS191NFM0Y1EX1JH","Daniel Avila","01M6ADJHGM78PHQRD3XZTFDVKK",33481,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development\u002FSKILL.md",[18],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发","SCENARIO","使用场景",[24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34],"development","subagent driven development","subagent","driven","tasks","session","use","implementation","plans","with","when","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: subagent-driven-development\ndescription: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session\n---\n\n# Subagent-Driven Development\n\nExecute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.\n\n**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration\n\n## When to Use\n\n```dot\ndigraph when_to_use {\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"subagent-driven-development\" [shape=box];\n    \"executing-plans\" [shape=box];\n    \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [shape=box];\n\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Stay in this session?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no - tightly coupled\"];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"subagent-driven-development\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"executing-plans\" [label=\"no - parallel session\"];\n}\n```\n\n**vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):**\n- Same session (no context switch)\n- Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)\n- Two-stage review after each task: spec compliance first, then code quality\n- Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)\n\n## The Process\n\n```dot\ndigraph process {\n    rankdir=TB;\n\n    subgraph cluster_per_task {\n        label=\"Per Task\";\n        \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Answer questions, provide context\" [shape=box];\n        \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [shape=box];\n        \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [shape=box];\n        \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [shape=box];\n        \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    }\n\n    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    \"More tasks remain?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [shape=box];\n    \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];\n\n    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\";\n    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Answer questions, provide context\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Answer questions, provide context\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\";\n    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\";\n    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" -> \"More tasks remain?\";\n    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" -> \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\";\n}\n```\n\n## Prompt Templates\n\n- `.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md` - Dispatch implementer subagent\n- `.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch spec compliance reviewer subagent\n- `.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent\n\n## Example Workflow\n\n```\nYou: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.\n\n[Read plan file once: docs\u002Fplans\u002Ffeature-plan.md]\n[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]\n[Create TodoWrite with all tasks]\n\nTask 1: Hook installation script\n\n[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]\n[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n\nImplementer: \"Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?\"\n\nYou: \"User level (~\u002F.config\u002Fsuperpowers\u002Fhooks\u002F)\"\n\nImplementer: \"Got it. Implementing now...\"\n[Later] Implementer:\n  - Implemented install-hook command\n  - Added tests, 5\u002F5 passing\n  - Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it\n  - Committed\n\n[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\nSpec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant - all requirements met, nothing extra\n\n[Get git SHAs, dispatch code quality reviewer]\nCode reviewer: Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Approved.\n\n[Mark Task 1 complete]\n\nTask 2: Recovery modes\n\n[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]\n[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n\nImplementer: [No questions, proceeds]\nImplementer:\n  - Added verify\u002Frepair modes\n  - 8\u002F8 tests passing\n  - Self-review: All good\n  - Committed\n\n[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\nSpec reviewer: ❌ Issues:\n  - Missing: Progress reporting (spec says \"report every 100 items\")\n  - Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)\n\n[Implementer fixes issues]\nImplementer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting\n\n[Spec reviewer reviews again]\nSpec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant now\n\n[Dispatch code quality reviewer]\nCode reviewer: Strengths: Solid. Issues (Important): Magic number (100)\n\n[Implementer fixes]\nImplementer: Extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant\n\n[Code reviewer reviews again]\nCode reviewer: ✅ Approved\n\n[Mark Task 2 complete]\n\n...\n\n[After all tasks]\n[Dispatch final code-reviewer]\nFinal reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge\n\nDone!\n```\n\n## Advantages\n\n**vs. Manual execution:**\n- Subagents follow TDD naturally\n- Fresh context per task (no confusion)\n- Parallel-safe (subagents don't interfere)\n- Subagent can ask questions (before AND during work)\n\n**vs. Executing Plans:**\n- Same session (no handoff)\n- Continuous progress (no waiting)\n- Review checkpoints automatic\n\n**Efficiency gains:**\n- No file reading overhead (controller provides full text)\n- Controller curates exactly what context is needed\n- Subagent gets complete information upfront\n- Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)\n\n**Quality gates:**\n- Self-review catches issues before handoff\n- Two-stage review: spec compliance, then code quality\n- Review loops ensure fixes actually work\n- Spec compliance prevents over\u002Funder-building\n- Code quality ensures implementation is well-built\n\n**Cost:**\n- More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task)\n- Controller does more prep work (extracting all tasks upfront)\n- Review loops add iterations\n- But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging later)\n\n## Red Flags\n\n**Never:**\n- Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)\n- Proceed with unfixed issues\n- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)\n- Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)\n- Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)\n- Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)\n- Accept \"close enough\" on spec compliance (spec reviewer found issues = not done)\n- Skip review loops (reviewer found issues = implementer fixes = review again)\n- Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)\n- **Start code quality review before spec compliance is ✅** (wrong order)\n- Move to next task while either review has open issues\n\n**If subagent asks questions:**\n- Answer clearly and completely\n- Provide additional context if needed\n- Don't rush them into implementation\n\n**If reviewer finds issues:**\n- Implementer (same subagent) fixes them\n- Reviewer reviews again\n- Repeat until approved\n- Don't skip the re-review\n\n**If subagent fails task:**\n- Dispatch fix subagent with specific instructions\n- Don't try to fix manually (context pollution)\n\n## Integration\n\n**Required workflow skills:**\n- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes\n- **superpowers:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for reviewer subagents\n- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks\n\n**Subagents should use:**\n- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - Subagents follow TDD for each task\n\n**Alternative workflow:**\n- **superpowers:executing-plans** - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution\n","# Subagent-Driven Development\n\nExecute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.\n\n**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration\n\n## When to Use\n\n```dot\ndigraph when_to_use {\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"subagent-driven-development\" [shape=box];\n    \"executing-plans\" [shape=box];\n    \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [shape=box];\n\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Tasks mostly independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Have implementation plan?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Stay in this session?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Tasks mostly independent?\" -> \"Manual execution or brainstorm first\" [label=\"no - tightly coupled\"];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"subagent-driven-development\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Stay in this session?\" -> \"executing-plans\" [label=\"no - parallel session\"];\n}\n```\n\n**vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):**\n- Same session (no context switch)\n- Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)\n- Two-stage review after each task: spec compliance first, then code quality\n- Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)\n\n## The Process\n\n```dot\ndigraph process {\n    rankdir=TB;\n\n    subgraph cluster_per_task {\n        label=\"Per Task\";\n        \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Answer questions, provide context\" [shape=box];\n        \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [shape=box];\n        \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [shape=box];\n        \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [shape=box];\n        \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" [shape=diamond];\n        \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [shape=box];\n        \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    }\n\n    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" [shape=box];\n    \"More tasks remain?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [shape=box];\n    \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];\n\n    \"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\";\n    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Answer questions, provide context\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Answer questions, provide context\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Implementer subagent asks questions?\" -> \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\";\n    \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\";\n    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps\" -> \"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    \"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" -> \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\";\n    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues\" -> \"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"re-review\"];\n    \"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?\" -> \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Mark task complete in TodoWrite\" -> \"More tasks remain?\";\n    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch implementer subagent (.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md)\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"More tasks remain?\" -> \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" [label=\"no\"];\n    \"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation\" -> \"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch\";\n}\n```\n\n## Prompt Templates\n\n- `.\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md` - Dispatch implementer subagent\n- `.\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch spec compliance reviewer subagent\n- `.\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md` - Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent\n\n## Example Workflow\n\n```\nYou: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.\n\n[Read plan file once: docs\u002Fplans\u002Ffeature-plan.md]\n[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]\n[Create TodoWrite with all tasks]\n\nTask 1: Hook installation script\n\n[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]\n[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n\nImplementer: \"Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?\"\n\nYou: \"User level (~\u002F.config\u002Fsuperpowers\u002Fhooks\u002F)\"\n\nImplementer: \"Got it. Implementing now...\"\n[Later] Implementer:\n  - Implemented install-hook command\n  - Added tests, 5\u002F5 passing\n  - Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it\n  - Committed\n\n[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\nSpec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant - all requirements met, nothing extra\n\n[Get git SHAs, dispatch code quality reviewer]\nCode reviewer: Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Approved.\n\n[Mark Task 1 complete]\n\nTask 2: Recovery modes\n\n[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]\n[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]\n\nImplementer: [No questions, proceeds]\nImplementer:\n  - Added verify\u002Frepair modes\n  - 8\u002F8 tests passing\n  - Self-review: All good\n  - Committed\n\n[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]\nSpec reviewer: ❌ Issues:\n  - Missing: Progress reporting (spec says \"report every 100 items\")\n  - Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)\n\n[Implementer fixes issues]\nImplementer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting\n\n[Spec reviewer reviews again]\nSpec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant now\n\n[Dispatch code quality reviewer]\nCode reviewer: Strengths: Solid. Issues (Important): Magic number (100)\n\n[Implementer fixes]\nImplementer: Extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant\n\n[Code reviewer reviews again]\nCode reviewer: ✅ Approved\n\n[Mark Task 2 complete]\n\n...\n\n[After all tasks]\n[Dispatch final code-reviewer]\nFinal reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge\n\nDone!\n```\n\n## Advantages\n\n**vs. Manual execution:**\n- Subagents follow TDD naturally\n- Fresh context per task (no confusion)\n- Parallel-safe (subagents don't interfere)\n- Subagent can ask questions (before AND during work)\n\n**vs. Executing Plans:**\n- Same session (no handoff)\n- Continuous progress (no waiting)\n- Review checkpoints automatic\n\n**Efficiency gains:**\n- No file reading overhead (controller provides full text)\n- Controller curates exactly what context is needed\n- Subagent gets complete information upfront\n- Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)\n\n**Quality gates:**\n- Self-review catches issues before handoff\n- Two-stage review: spec compliance, then code quality\n- Review loops ensure fixes actually work\n- Spec compliance prevents over\u002Funder-building\n- Code quality ensures implementation is well-built\n\n**Cost:**\n- More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task)\n- Controller does more prep work (extracting all tasks upfront)\n- Review loops add iterations\n- But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging later)\n\n## Red Flags\n\n**Never:**\n- Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)\n- Proceed with unfixed issues\n- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)\n- Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)\n- Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)\n- Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)\n- Accept \"close enough\" on spec compliance (spec reviewer found issues = not done)\n- Skip review loops (reviewer found issues = implementer fixes = review again)\n- Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)\n- **Start code quality review before spec compliance is ✅** (wrong order)\n- Move to next task while either review has open issues\n\n**If subagent asks questions:**\n- Answer clearly and completely\n- Provide additional context if needed\n- Don't rush them into implementation\n\n**If reviewer finds issues:**\n- Implementer (same subagent) fixes them\n- Reviewer reviews again\n- Repeat until approved\n- Don't skip the re-review\n\n**If subagent fails task:**\n- Dispatch fix subagent with specific instructions\n- Don't try to fix manually (context pollution)\n\n## Integration\n\n**Required workflow skills:**\n- **superpowers:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes\n- **superpowers:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for reviewer subagents\n- **superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks\n\n**Subagents should use:**\n- **superpowers:test-driven-development** - Subagents follow TDD for each task\n\n**Alternative workflow:**\n- **superpowers:executing-plans** - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"main","2b749c82b5d11fac39d9a6e021ce3f5b8a541bd1","cli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development",3931,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates","https:\u002F\u002Faitmpl.com","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7","https:\u002F\u002Fdanielavila.me","Building AI dev tools with LLMs","2026-11-14 06:14:46",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":51,"prompt":61,"zipAvailable":62},[52,55,58],{"tool":53,"command":54},"npx","npx skills add davila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates --skill subagent-driven-development",{"tool":56,"command":57},"bunx","bunx skills add davila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates --skill subagent-driven-development",{"tool":59,"command":60},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add davila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates --skill subagent-driven-development","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development\u002FSKILL.md",true,[64,70,74],{"path":65,"resourceType":66,"resourceTypeDesc":67,"sizeBytes":68,"sourceHtmlUrl":69},"code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md","REFERENCE","参考文档",630,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development\u002Fcode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md",{"path":71,"resourceType":66,"resourceTypeDesc":67,"sizeBytes":72,"sourceHtmlUrl":73},"implementer-prompt.md",2195,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development\u002Fimplementer-prompt.md",{"path":75,"resourceType":66,"resourceTypeDesc":67,"sizeBytes":76,"sourceHtmlUrl":77},"spec-reviewer-prompt.md",1999,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fai-research\u002Fsubagent-driven-development\u002Fspec-reviewer-prompt.md",[79,104,131,164,199,223],{"skillNo":80,"name":81,"nameZh":6,"description":82,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":83,"categories":84,"keywords":86,"publishedAt":35},"01M70NHBTQ8BV0A2SCAZXEPHCX","wealthville-pool-scoring","Score DeFi liquidity pools before providing liquidity. Returns a 0-100 pool score and an Enter\u002FHold\u002FExit\u002FReduce\u002FAvoid verdict with calibrated confidence for ~68,800 Solana pools and 575 EVM pools, plus a public miss-inclusive track record. Use when asked whether a pool is worth LPing into, which pools look best right now, or how accurate the scores have actually been.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fweb-data\u002Fwealthville-pool-scoring\u002FSKILL.md",[85],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,30,34,95,33,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103],"scoring","pool","wealthville pool scoring","liquidity","which","for","exit","now","reduce","record","track","verdict","evm","solana","how","public","look",{"skillNo":105,"name":106,"nameZh":6,"description":107,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":108,"categories":109,"keywords":111,"publishedAt":35},"01M70MB6VR8ERJ4EM8D5KHBMEV","technical-debt-auditor","Scans a codebase and produces a quantified technical debt report with a prioritized remediation plan. Analyzes dead code, TODO\u002FFIXME\u002FHACK markers, dependency staleness, complexity hotspots, code duplication signals, test coverage gaps, unused exports, and outdated patterns. Use this skill when the user asks to audit their codebase for tech debt, wants a health check of their code quality, says things like \"where should I focus refactoring\", \"find code smells\", \"audit my codebase\", \"what technical debt do we have\", \"prioritize cleanup work\", or asks about code quality metrics. Also trigger when the user mentions \"code rot\", \"legacy cleanup\", \"refactoring priorities\", or wants to understand the overall health of a project before a major effort. Trigger even if the user doesn't say \"technical debt\" explicitly — any request to systematically assess code quality and identify improvement priorities belongs here.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fdevelopment\u002Ftechnical-debt-auditor\u002FSKILL.md",[110],{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,34,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130],"technical debt","debt","technical","technical debt auditor","auditor","coverage","complexity","markers","project","cleanup","unused","code","todo","work","plan","focus","signals","audit","dependency",{"skillNo":132,"name":133,"nameZh":6,"description":134,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":135,"categories":136,"keywords":146,"publishedAt":35},"01M70KPYH9QNHCNME5GJQGE22K","readonly-sql-guard","Make an agent's database access provably read-only. Use when an agent runs caller-supplied SQL against a production\u002FERP\u002Fanalytics database (a \"query\" MCP tool, text-to-SQL, an admin console), or when reviewing DB-access code for write\u002FDDL\u002Fside-effect\u002Ftransaction-escape risks. Checks what a statement CALLS, not just its shape.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fdatabase\u002Freadonly-sql-guard\u002FSKILL.md",[137,140,141],{"categoryNo":138,"categoryName":139,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000010","后端与接口",{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":142,"categoryName":143,"taxonomyType":144,"taxonomyTypeDesc":145},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000033","数据分析师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[147,148,149,150,151,152,153,92,154,155,156,157,158,159,160,30,161,162,34,163],"readonly","guard","sql guard","sql","readonly sql guard","erp","effect","read-only","db","just","tool","calls","only","MCP","access","database","query",{"skillNo":165,"name":166,"nameZh":6,"description":167,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":168,"licenseFileUrl":169,"sourceHtmlUrl":170,"categories":171,"keywords":175,"publishedAt":35},"01M6AFY6F7CC2BBZP1QD6VTNVC","web-artifacts-builder","Suite of tools for creating elaborate, multi-component claude.ai HTML artifacts using modern frontend web technologies (React, Tailwind CSS, shadcn\u002Fui). Use for complex artifacts requiring state management, routing, or shadcn\u002Fui components - not for simple single-file HTML\u002FJSX artifacts.","Apache-2.0","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Futilities\u002Fweb-artifacts-builder\u002FLICENSE.txt","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Futilities\u002Fweb-artifacts-builder\u002FSKILL.md",[172],{"categoryNo":173,"categoryName":174,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000009","前端开发",[176,177,178,179,180,181,182,183,184,185,186,187,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195,196,197,92,198],"artifacts builder","web","web artifacts builder","artifacts","builder","state","routing","state management","component","css","frontend","ui","Tools","file","components","shadcn","react","Tailwind","suite","jsx","html","single-file","ui components",{"skillNo":200,"name":201,"nameZh":6,"description":202,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":168,"licenseFileUrl":203,"sourceHtmlUrl":204,"categories":205,"keywords":210,"publishedAt":35},"01M6AFWF33SFV9Z3SF4PEEE4BF","webapp-testing","Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fwebapp-testing\u002FLICENSE.txt","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fsecurity\u002Fwebapp-testing\u002FSKILL.md",[206,209],{"categoryNo":207,"categoryName":208,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量",{"categoryNo":173,"categoryName":174,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},[211,212,213,214,215,177,216,186,187,217,218,219,220,92,221,33,222],"webapp testing","testing","webapp","browser","playwright","applications","debugging","toolkit","logs","screenshots","local","behavior",{"skillNo":224,"name":225,"nameZh":6,"description":226,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":168,"licenseFileUrl":227,"sourceHtmlUrl":228,"categories":229,"keywords":237,"publishedAt":35},"01M6AF67Q67JJJ5V51JR2P52KA","discernment-nudge","After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fproductivity\u002Fdiscernment-nudge\u002FLICENSE.txt","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fdavila7\u002Fclaude-code-templates\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fcli-tool\u002Fcomponents\u002Fskills\u002Fproductivity\u002Fdiscernment-nudge\u002FSKILL.md",[230,233,234],{"categoryNo":231,"categoryName":232,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000018","写作与文案",{"categoryNo":19,"categoryName":20,"taxonomyType":21,"taxonomyTypeDesc":22},{"categoryNo":235,"categoryName":236,"taxonomyType":144,"taxonomyTypeDesc":145},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000036","内容创作者",[238,239,240,241,242,243,244,245,179,246,189,123,247,248,249,250,251,159,252,34,253,254,255,256,257,101,258],"discernment nudge","nudge","interpretation","help","run","reasoning","data","writing","lookup","content","review","conversation","short","up","invoke","you","analysis","claims","argument","assemble","recommendations"]