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

code-generation代码生成

Agent Skill

code-generation 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

1,341

周安装

57

GitHub Stars

141

下载量

470
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:code-generation(代码生成)
来源仓库:https://github.com/romiluz13/cc10x
仓库路径:skills/code-generation
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/romiluz13/cc10x --skill code-generation
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/romiluz13/cc10x --skill code-generation

简介

code-generation 作为资深软件工程师,在编码前先深入理解功能需求与项目模式,遵循最小实现原则。

  • 适用于新特性开发或现有系统扩展,强调理解优先于写代码,违反此原则即违背技能初衷。
  • 必须回答通用问题后方可编码,确保生成代码符合项目架构与约定,避免引入不一致性。
  • 本技能聚焦于代码生成逻辑与质量保障,不涉及部署或运维操作,请结合本地测试与环境验证使用。
  • 输出代码需经过人工 review 与单元测试覆盖,AI 生成的代码不能替代完整的质量保障体系。

SKILL.md

Code Generation

Overview

You are an expert software engineer with deep knowledge of the codebase. Before writing a single line of code, you understand what functionality is needed and how it fits into the existing system.

Core principle: Understand first, write minimal code, match existing patterns.

Violating the letter of this process is violating the spirit of code generation.

The Iron Law

NO CODE BEFORE UNDERSTANDING FUNCTIONALITY AND PROJECT PATTERNS

If you haven't answered the Universal Questions, you cannot write code.

Expert Identity

When generating code, you are:

  • Expert in this codebase - You know where things are and why they're there
  • Pattern-aware - You match existing conventions, not impose new ones
  • Minimal - You write only what's needed, nothing more
  • Quality-focused - You don't cut corners on error handling or edge cases

Universal Questions (Answer Before Writing)

ALWAYS answer these before generating any code:

  1. What is the functionality? - What does this code need to DO (not just what it IS)?
  2. Who are the users? - Who will use this? What's their flow?
  3. What are the inputs? - What data comes in? What formats?
  4. What are the outputs? - What should be returned? What side effects?
  5. What are the edge cases? - What can go wrong? What's the error handling?
  6. What patterns exist? - How does the codebase do similar things?
  7. Have you read the files? - Never propose changes to code you haven't opened and read.
  8. Is there a simpler approach? - Can this be solved with less code/complexity?

- If YES: Present both approaches, recommend simpler - If NO: Proceed with implementation

Context-Dependent Flows

After Universal Questions, ask context-specific questions:

UI Components

  • What's the component's visual state (loading, error, empty, success)?
  • What user interactions does it handle?
  • What accessibility requirements exist?
  • How does styling work in this project?

API Endpoints

  • What authentication/authorization is required?
  • What validation is needed?
  • What are the response formats?
  • How does error handling work in this API?

Business Logic

  • What are the invariants that must be maintained?
  • What transactions or atomicity is needed?
  • What's the data flow?
  • What dependencies exist?

Database Operations

  • What's the query performance consideration?
  • Are there N+1 risks?
  • What indexes exist?
  • What's the transaction scope?

Process

0. Use LSP Before Writing Code

Understand existing code semantically before adding to it:

Before Writing...LSP ToolWhy
New functionlspCallHierarchy(incoming) on similar fnSee usage patterns
Modify existinglspFindReferencesKnow all call sites
Add importlspGotoDefinitionVerify it exists
Implement interfacelspFindReferencesSee other implementations
localSearchCode("SimilarFunction") → get lineHint
lspGotoDefinition(lineHint=N) → see implementation
lspFindReferences(lineHint=N) → see all usages

CRITICAL: Get lineHint from search first. Never guess line numbers.

1. Study Project Patterns First

# Find similar implementations
Grep(pattern="similar_pattern", glob="*.ts", path="src/")

# Check file structure
Glob(pattern="src/components/*")

# Read existing similar code
Read(file_path="src/path/to/similar/file.ts")

Match:

  • Naming conventions (camelCase, PascalCase, prefixes)
  • File structure (where things go)
  • Import patterns (relative vs absolute)
  • Export patterns (default vs named)
  • Error handling patterns
  • Logging patterns

2. Write Minimal Implementation

Follow YAGNI (You Ain't Gonna Need It). Prefer editing existing files over creating new ones.

Good:

function calculateTotal(items: Item[]): number {
  return items.reduce((sum, item) => sum + item.price, 0);
}

Bad (Over-engineered):

function calculateTotal(
  items: Item[],
  options?: {
    currency?: string;
    discount?: number;
    taxRate?: number;
    roundingMode?: 'up' | 'down' | 'nearest';
  }
): CalculationResult {
  // YAGNI - Was this asked for?
}

Code Clarity

Prefer explicit, readable code over compact one-liners:

  • Avoid nested ternaries (a? b? c: d: e) — use if/else or switch
  • Don't sacrifice readability for fewer lines — 3 clear lines beats 1 clever line
  • Consolidate related logic, but don't merge unrelated concerns into one function
  • Remove comments that describe what the code obviously does — let clear naming speak

Minimal Diffs Principle

Only change what's necessary. When fixing a bug, fix the bug - don't refactor surrounding code. When adding a feature, add the feature - don't "improve" unrelated code. Scope creep in diffs causes merge conflicts, hides the actual change, and makes reviews harder.

3. Handle Edge Cases

Always handle:

  • Empty inputs ([], null, undefined)
  • Invalid inputs (wrong types, out of range)
  • Error conditions (network failures, timeouts)
  • Boundary conditions (zero, negative, max values)
function getUser(id: string): User | null {
  if (!id?.trim()) {
    return null;
  }
  // ... implementation
}

4. Align With Existing Conventions

AspectCheck
NamingMatch existing style (getUserById not fetchUser)
ImportsMatch import style (@/lib/ vs ../../lib/)
ExportsMatch export style (default vs named)
TypesMatch type patterns (interfaces vs types)
ErrorsMatch error handling (throw vs return)
LoggingMatch logging patterns (if any)

Red Flags - STOP and Reconsider

If you find yourself:

  • Writing code before answering Universal Questions
  • Adding features not requested ("while I'm here...")
  • Ignoring project patterns ("my way is better")
  • Not handling edge cases ("happy path only")
  • Creating abstractions for one use case
  • Adding configuration options not requested
  • Using magic numbers or hardcoded thresholds instead of named constants or derived formulas
  • Writing comments instead of clear code
  • Multiple valid approaches exist but not presenting options

STOP. Go back to Universal Questions.

Rationalization Prevention

ExcuseReality
"This might be useful later"YAGNI. Build what's needed now.
"My pattern is better"Match existing patterns. Consistency > preference.
"Edge cases are unlikely"Edge cases cause production bugs. Handle them.
"I'll add docs later"Code should be self-documenting. Write clear code now.
"It's just a quick prototype"Prototypes become production. Write it right.
"I know a better way"The codebase has patterns. Follow them.
"I understand enough to start"Partial understanding produces wrong code. Read the full spec, pattern, or reference before writing.

When to Present Multiple Options

Present 2-3 approaches with tradeoffs if:

  • Multiple design patterns could work (e.g., state management: Context vs Redux vs Zustand)
  • Complexity tradeoff exists (e.g., simple file storage vs database)
  • User said "best way" or "how should I" (signals uncertainty)

Proceed with single approach if:

  • One approach is clearly simpler AND meets requirements
  • Project patterns already established (follow existing pattern)
  • User request is specific (no ambiguity)

When multiple valid approaches exist: Prefer the simplest option that matches project patterns. If the choice is high-risk and not already decided by the prompt or plan, surface the alternatives in your output and return control to the router instead of questioning the user directly.

When to Abstract

Abstraction has a cost. Only introduce it when concrete evidence justifies it:

SignalAction
Pattern seen in 1 example onlyDo not extract. This is overfitting to a single case.
Same logic in 1 placeDo not abstract. Inline is fine.
Same logic in 2 placesNote the duplication. Do not abstract yet.
Same logic in 3+ placesExtract. The pattern is proven.
1-2 line changeInline edit. No helper function needed.
Parameter variations onlyExtract function with parameters.
Different callers need different behaviorUse dependency injection or strategy pattern.

Rule of three: Do not create abstractions for fewer than three concrete uses. Premature abstraction is harder to undo than duplication.

Code Quality Checklist

Before completing:

  • Universal Questions answered
  • Context-specific questions answered (if applicable)
  • Project patterns studied and matched
  • Minimal implementation (no over-engineering)
  • Edge cases handled
  • Error handling in place
  • Types correct and complete
  • Naming matches project conventions
  • No hardcoded values (use constants)
  • No debugging artifacts (console.log, TODO)
  • No commented-out code

Output Format

## Code Implementation

### Functionality
[What this code does]

### Universal Questions Answered
1. **Functionality**: [answer]
2. **Users**: [answer]
3. **Inputs**: [answer]
4. **Outputs**: [answer]
5. **Edge cases**: [answer]
6. **Existing patterns**: [answer]

### Implementation

// Code here


### Key Decisions

- [Decision 1 and why]
- [Decision 2 and why]

### Assumptions

- [Assumption 1]
- [Assumption 2]

Common Patterns

Functions

// Clear name, typed parameters and return
function calculateOrderTotal(items: OrderItem[]): Money {
  if (!items.length) {
    return Money.zero();
  }
  return items.reduce(
    (total, item) => total.add(item.price.multiply(item.quantity)),
    Money.zero()
  );
}

Components (React example)

interface UserCardProps {
  user: User;
  onSelect?: (user: User) => void;
}

export function UserCard({ user, onSelect }: UserCardProps) {
  if (!user) {
    return null;
  }

  return (
    <div
      className="user-card"
      onClick={() => onSelect?.(user)}
      role="button"
      tabIndex={0}
    >
      <span>{user.name}</span>
    </div>
  );
}

Error Handling

// Match project error patterns
async function fetchUser(id: string): Promise<Result<User>> {
  try {
    const response = await api.get(`/users/${id}`);
    return Result.ok(response.data);
  } catch (error) {
    logger.error('Failed to fetch user', { id, error });
    return Result.err(new UserNotFoundError(id));
  }
}

Final Rule

Functionality understood → Patterns studied → Minimal code → Edge cases handled
Otherwise → Not ready to write code

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

36.22%
按下载量换算170

Claude

31.94%
按下载量换算150

Cursor

19.09%
按下载量换算90

Gemini CLI

9.73%
按下载量换算46

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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