Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

assemble-panel组装面板

Agent Skill

assemble-panel 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

4,308

周安装

176

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

1,394
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:assemble-panel(组装面板)
来源仓库:https://github.com/camacho/ai-skills
仓库路径:skills/assemble-panel
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/camacho/ai-skills --skill assemble-panel
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/camacho/ai-skills --skill assemble-panel

简介

assemble-panel 用于集中管理评审者选择与循环治理策略,返回结构化面板与执行策略。

  • 适用于代码审查、计划评审等需要多角色协同的质量保障场景。
  • 它根据作用域(计划文件或 git diff)生成有序评审队列与优先级、数量控制策略。
  • 默认 fallback 为 technical-editor 与 code-reviewer,确保在无配置时仍有基本评审能力。
  • 调用方负责实际派发与结果处理,本技能仅产出数据不执行文件修改或外部调用。

SKILL.md

Assemble Panel

Centralizes reviewer selection and loop governance. Returns a panel + policy to the caller; the caller dispatches. This skill produces data — it never dispatches agents or modifies files.

Integration Contract

Callers provide:

  • scope: a plan file path OR a git diff (the artifact under review)
  • overrides (optional): {include: [], exclude: []}

Returns (structured text the caller parses):

  • panel: ordered list of reviewer agent names
  • policy: gate, cap, and the algebra below

Fallback when unavailable: [technical-editor, code-reviewer], gate=P2, cap=3.

Cross-tool note: Codex/Cursor cannot invoke skills via the Skill tool. Read this file directly and apply the policy algebra inline.

Policy Algebra (frozen — do not modify, version: 1)

DEFAULTS:
  gate    = P2                       # fix P0-P2, record P3+
  cap     = 3                        # max rounds before escalate
  always  = [technical-editor]       # expandable, never reducible

ASSEMBLE(scope: plan_file | diff):
  panel = always
        + select_by_scope(file_types(scope))
        + select_by_keywords(body(scope))
        + overrides.include
        - overrides.exclude            # cannot remove `always` members

RETAIN(reviewer, round_findings):
  keep(reviewer) while round_findings.any_above(gate)

EXPAND(panel, prior_scope, current_scope):
  new_coverage = file_types(current_scope) - file_types(prior_scope)
  panel += select_by_scope(new_coverage) when new_coverage

CONVERGE(round, panel, cap):
  APPROVE   when all(reviewer.done for reviewer in panel)
  ESCALATE  when round >= cap
  EXIT      when any(reviewer.verdict == DROP)
  continue  otherwise

ESCALATE_RECURRING(finding, rounds_present):
  finding.severity += 1 when rounds_present >= 2

Scope-to-Reviewer Map

Used by select_by_scope(file_types):

File patternReviewer
.ts, .js, src/, tests/code-reviewer
.yml, .github/workflows/code-reviewer, security-auditor
.sh, scripts/, hooks/code-reviewer, security-auditor
.md (plans, ADRs, docs)architect-reviewer
*.css, *.tsx, UI componentsdesign-reviewer, accessibility-tester
sync.sh, AGENTS.md, config.toml, skillscodex-specialist
*.pem, *.key, secrets patternssecurity-auditor

When multiple patterns match, union all reviewers. Duplicates collapsed.

Keyword-to-Reviewer Map

Used by select_by_keywords(body):

Keyword / phraseReviewer
"architecture", "ADR", "system design", "plan"architect-reviewer
"security", "auth", "token", "PAT", "OIDC"security-auditor
"WCAG", "accessibility", "a11y", "aria"accessibility-tester
"UI", "component", "layout", "design system"design-reviewer
"docs", "research", "ecosystem", "reference", "educational"fact-checker
"Codex", "cross-tool", "sync.sh"codex-specialist

Keywords are case-insensitive substring matches against the scope body.

Override Rules

  • overrides.include appends reviewers unconditionally.
  • overrides.exclude removes reviewers EXCEPT those in always. Attempting to exclude an always member is silently ignored.
  • Invalid reviewer names are rejected with an error listing valid names.

Failure Modes

  • Scope empty or unreadable: return always panel only, warn caller.
  • No file types detected: fall back to keyword matching only. If neither matches, return always panel.
  • Caller requests cap > 5: clamp to 5. Non-negotiable ceiling.
  • Panel exceeds 5 members: warn caller — likely a sign the change is too broad.
  • Reviewer unavailable at dispatch time: caller skips that reviewer and notes the gap.

Orchestrator Authority

The panel recommends; the orchestrator (the agent dispatching the panel) decides. The gate and cap above are inputs to that decision, not overrides of it.

MAY:

  • Descope a P1/P2 finding if addressing it balloons scope past a single concern — file a follow-up issue.
  • Split into phased PRs when panel findings grow scope past a reasonable single landing. Core ships first; hardening and docs follow. Pre-dispatch: before handing off to an implementer, check the plan's scope — if Files-to-Modify > 5 OR total planned test count > 8, split into sequential phases upfront. The reactive trigger above fires after panel feedback; this fires before implementation starts, preventing single-agent context overflow (e.g., PR #241: 3 new scripts + aggregator changes + ADR + 11 tests → 78 tool uses → overflow).
  • Push back on false positives with explicit rationale. If the same finding recurs across reviewers or rounds, examine why — either the reviewers are right, or there's a structural reason the code looks like the pattern they're flagging. When pushing back, name the finding (reviewer + severity + quoted text), give the rationale, and cite evidence (code paths, existing patterns, prior ADRs).
  • Accept with documented deviation — address some P1s, defer others with justification in the plan's Risks section.

MUST NOT:

  • Silently drop P0 findings. P0 must be addressed, escalated, or the plan rejected.
  • Override security-auditor findings without escalating to a human.

Escalate to human when:

  • A P0 is disputed and the rationale for pushback isn't clear.
  • Multiple reviewers converge on a concern the orchestrator disagrees with.
  • A security finding's mitigation trade-off affects the trust model.

Example pushback:

Security-auditor P1: "Include severity inside HMAC payload." Orchestrator: Pushing back. Severity is computed by a separate classifier (classify-findings.sh), not emitted by the CLI wrapper, so it's not available at sign-time. Binding it into HMAC would require restructuring the entire review pipeline. Alternative: include tier in fingerprint — this closes the cross-tier collision vector without HMAC restructure. Will address P0-2 with tier-in-fingerprint; defer severity-in-HMAC as a separate ADR if needed.

Output Format

PANEL: technical-editor, code-reviewer, security-auditor
GATE: P2
CAP: 3
ALWAYS: technical-editor
NOTE: codex-specialist included — scope touches sync.sh

One NOTE line per non-obvious selection decision. Callers surface these in review summaries.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

33.41%
按下载量换算466

Claude

30.48%
按下载量换算425

Cursor

19.3%
按下载量换算269

Gemini CLI

9.18%
按下载量换算128

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills