Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
运维和基础设施需要联网github未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

decisive-action果断行动

Agent Skill

decisive-action 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。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

784

周安装

33

GitHub Stars

264

下载量

275
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

3

许可证

MIT

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:decisive-action(果断行动)
来源仓库:https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market
仓库路径:skills/decisive-action
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market --skill decisive-action
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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/athola/claude-night-market --skill decisive-action

简介

指导何时提出澄清问题 versus 自主推进执行动作。

  • 核心原则是仅在歧义会实质损害正确性时才询问。
  • 适用于意图清晰但需判断介入程度的自动化操作场景。
  • 高风险不可逆操作仍需显式确认,不在此技能覆盖范围内。
  • decisive-action 属于运维和基础设施类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Decisive Action

Guidance on when to ask clarifying questions versus proceeding autonomously.

When To Use

  • Reducing unnecessary clarifying questions
  • Taking autonomous action when intent is clear

When NOT To Use

  • High-stakes irreversible operations requiring explicit confirmation
  • Ambiguous requirements where clarification prevents wasted work

Core Principle

Ask questions only when ambiguity would materially impair correctness or capacity to fulfill the request precisely.

When to Ask (High Impact Ambiguity)

Always Ask For

ScenarioWhyExample
Destructive OperationsIrreversible, high cost of error"Delete which files?"
Multiple Valid ApproachesMaterially different tradeoffs"Add index vs cache vs denormalize?"
Security-CriticalWrong choice = vulnerability"Which auth method?"
Data MigrationData loss risk"Preserve or transform?"
Breaking ChangesAffects downstream users"Deprecate or remove?"

Ask Threshold Checklist

Before asking, verify:

  • >30% chance of wrong interpretation
  • Error cost > correction cost
  • No clear standard approach exists
  • User context doesn't clarify intent

When to Proceed Without Asking

Default to Action For

ScenarioWhyAssumption
Standard Approach ExistsIndustry conventionUse conventional pattern
Easily ReversibleLow cost of errorCan undo via git/backup
Clear from ContextIntent is obviousProceed with stated goal
User Can ReviewPR/dry-run availableChanges are inspectable

Proceed Threshold Checklist

Proceed without asking if:

  • Standard/obvious solution exists
  • Easily reversible (git, backup)
  • User can review before finalize
  • Context makes intent clear
  • Error cost < interruption cost

Decision Matrix

ReversibilityAmbiguityAction
ReversibleLowProceed
ReversibleHighProceed with preview
IrreversibleLowProceed with confirmation
IrreversibleHighAsk

Safety Mechanisms

Before Proceeding Autonomously

  1. Dry-run/Preview: Show proposed action before executing
  2. Backup First: Create git branch, backup directory
  3. Incremental Changes: Commit small, reviewable chunks
  4. Document Assumptions: In commit message or PR description

Undo Capability

Always ensure rollback is possible:

  • Git operations: git stash, backup branches
  • File operations: Copy before modify
  • Data operations: Transaction rollback

Examples

Example: Should Ask

User: "Delete the old files"

Analysis:

  • Destructive operation ✗
  • Multiple interpretations ✗
  • No clear standard ✗

Response:

Which files should I delete? I found:
- Files unchanged >6 months: 23 files
- Files in deprecated/: 5 files
- Files marked TODO remove: 2 files

Example: Should Proceed

User: "Add error handling to the parser"

Analysis:

  • Standard approach exists ✓
  • Easily reversible (git) ✓
  • User can review PR ✓

Action: Implement try/catch with logging, create PR.

Example: Proceed with Preview

User: "Refactor the API layer"

Analysis:

  • Multiple valid approaches
  • BUT: reversible via git
  • AND: user can review

Action:

Refactoring API layer. Proposed changes:

1. Extract authentication middleware
2. Standardize error responses
3. Add request validation

Creating branch: refactor/api-layer
Preview diff available before merge.

Anti-Patterns

Asking Too Much (Inefficient)

  • Asking for every implementation detail
  • Seeking validation for obvious choices
  • Repeating questions already answered in context

Asking Too Little (Risky)

  • Proceeding with destructive actions silently
  • Assuming intent when multiple valid interpretations exist
  • Ignoring ambiguity in security-critical operations

Integration

Combine with:

  • conserve:response-compression - Direct communication
  • sanctum:git-workspace-review - Context gathering
  • imbue:scope-guard - Scope management

Quick Reference

SituationAction
"Delete X"Ask which X
"Add feature"Proceed with standard approach
"Fix bug"Proceed with obvious fix
"Choose between A/B"Ask for preference
"Optimize query"Ask if multiple approaches
"Format code"Proceed with project style
"Deploy to prod"Ask for confirmation

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

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

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

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

能力 5

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

Claude Code

32.13%
按下载量换算88

OpenCode

22.33%
按下载量换算61

Cursor

17.79%
按下载量换算49

Codex

12.51%
按下载量换算34

Antigravity

8.91%
按下载量换算25

Gemini CLI

3.47%
按下载量换算10

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。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills