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

ears-authoring耳朵创作

Agent Skill

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

总安装

188

周安装

8

GitHub Stars

61

下载量

66
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:ears-authoring(耳朵创作)
来源仓库:https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins
仓库路径:skills/ears-authoring
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins --skill ears-authoring
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/melodic-software/claude-code-plugins --skill ears-authoring

简介

协助生成符合 EARS 语法规范的精确需求描述,提升需求可读性与执行一致性。

  • 适用于敏捷开发、产品迭代及跨团队沟通中对齐期望与减少歧义。
  • 输入原始需求后自动匹配最佳 EARS 模板并返回改写建议与适用理由说明。
  • 纯文本处理技能,无需外部依赖,但输出需经人工确认以避免误读业务逻辑。
  • ears-authoring 属于开发类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

EARS Authoring

EARS (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax) pattern authoring for precise, unambiguous requirements.

When to Use This Skill

Keywords: EARS patterns, ubiquitous requirements, state-driven requirements, event-driven requirements, unwanted behavior, optional features, complex requirements, SHALL keyword, requirement syntax

Use this skill when:

  • Writing new requirements using EARS syntax
  • Converting informal requirements to EARS format
  • Validating EARS pattern correctness
  • Selecting the right EARS pattern for a requirement
  • Understanding EARS anti-patterns

Quick Pattern Reference

PatternKeywordTemplate
Ubiquitous(none)The <entity> SHALL <action>
State-DrivenWHILEWHILE <condition>, the <entity> SHALL <action>
Event-DrivenWHENWHEN <trigger>, the <entity> SHALL <action>
UnwantedIF...THENIF <condition>, THEN the <entity> SHALL <action>
OptionalWHEREWHERE <feature>, the <entity> SHALL <action>
ComplexMultipleCombination of patterns

Pattern Selection Decision Tree

Start here: When does this requirement apply?

  1. Always applies (no conditions) → Use Ubiquitous: "The system SHALL..."
  2. While in a specific state → Use State-Driven: "WHILE in maintenance mode, the system SHALL..."
  3. When something happens (event/trigger) → Use Event-Driven: "WHEN user clicks submit, the system SHALL..."
  4. To handle unwanted behavior (error/exception) → Use Unwanted: "IF authentication fails, THEN the system SHALL..."
  5. Only when feature is enabled (optional/configurable) → Use Optional: "WHERE dark mode is enabled, the system SHALL..."
  6. Multiple conditions apply → Use Complex: "WHILE active, WHEN timeout occurs, the system SHALL..."

Pattern Details

Ubiquitous Pattern

Use when: Requirement applies unconditionally, always active.

Template:

The <entity> SHALL <action>

Keywords: None required (no WHILE, WHEN, IF, WHERE)

Examples:

  • "The system SHALL encrypt all data at rest"
  • "The API SHALL respond in JSON format"
  • "The application SHALL log all user actions"

Common Mistakes:

  • Adding unnecessary conditions when behavior is universal
  • Using "should" instead of "SHALL"

State-Driven Pattern

Use when: Behavior applies while system is in a particular state.

Template:

WHILE <condition>, the <entity> SHALL <action>

Keywords: WHILE (at start)

Examples:

  • "WHILE in maintenance mode, the system SHALL display a banner"
  • "WHILE the connection is active, the system SHALL send heartbeats"
  • "WHILE the user is authenticated, the system SHALL show the dashboard"

Common Mistakes:

  • Using WHEN instead of WHILE (WHEN = event, WHILE = state)
  • Describing events, not states

Event-Driven Pattern

Use when: Action triggered by a specific event or user action.

Template:

WHEN <trigger>, the <entity> SHALL <action>

Keywords: WHEN (at start)

Examples:

  • "WHEN a user submits the form, the system SHALL validate inputs"
  • "WHEN an error occurs, the system SHALL log the details"
  • "WHEN the session expires, the system SHALL redirect to login"

Common Mistakes:

  • Using WHILE instead of WHEN (WHILE = state, WHEN = event)
  • Describing states, not events

Unwanted Behavior Pattern

Use when: Handling exceptions, errors, or unwanted conditions.

Template:

IF <condition>, THEN the <entity> SHALL <action>

Keywords: IF...THEN (both required)

Examples:

  • "IF authentication fails, THEN the system SHALL lock the account"
  • "IF the database is unavailable, THEN the system SHALL queue requests"
  • "IF input validation fails, THEN the system SHALL display error messages"

Common Mistakes:

  • Using IF-THEN for normal behavior (use Event-Driven instead)
  • Missing THEN keyword
  • Using for positive conditions (reserve for negative/unwanted)

Optional Feature Pattern

Use when: Behavior depends on feature flag or configuration.

Template:

WHERE <feature/config>, the <entity> SHALL <action>

Keywords: WHERE (at start)

Examples:

  • "WHERE dark mode is enabled, the system SHALL use dark theme"
  • "WHERE audit logging is configured, the system SHALL log access"
  • "WHERE two-factor authentication is enabled, the system SHALL require OTP"

Common Mistakes:

  • Using IF instead of WHERE (IF = unwanted, WHERE = optional)
  • Describing mandatory features as optional

Complex Pattern

Use when: Requirement combines multiple conditions from different patterns.

Template:

<Pattern1>, <Pattern2>, the <entity> SHALL <action>

Examples:

  • "WHILE active, WHEN timeout occurs, the system SHALL reconnect"
  • "WHILE in production mode, IF error occurs, THEN the system SHALL notify ops"
  • "WHERE caching is enabled, WHEN data changes, the system SHALL invalidate cache"

Common Mistakes:

  • Using Complex when a simpler pattern suffices
  • Nesting conditions too deeply (max 2 recommended)

Writing Quality Requirements

The SHALL Keyword

Always use SHALL for requirements:

  • ✅ "The system SHALL validate input"
  • ❌ "The system should validate input"
  • ❌ "The system must validate input"
  • ❌ "The system will validate input"

Why: SHALL indicates mandatory behavior. Other words are ambiguous.

Active Voice

Always use active voice:

  • ✅ "The system SHALL encrypt data"
  • ❌ "Data shall be encrypted"
  • ❌ "Encryption shall be performed"

Single Requirement Per Statement

One action per requirement:

  • ✅ "The system SHALL validate input"
  • ✅ "The system SHALL log validation errors"
  • ❌ "The system SHALL validate input and log errors"

Testable Requirements

Requirements must be testable:

  • ✅ "The system SHALL respond within 200ms"
  • ❌ "The system SHALL respond quickly"
  • ✅ "The system SHALL support 1000 concurrent users"
  • ❌ "The system SHALL scale well"

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

Anti-PatternProblemFix
"should" instead of "SHALL"Ambiguous obligationUse "SHALL"
Passive voiceUnclear actorUse active voice
Multiple requirementsUntestable compoundSplit into separate
Implementation detailsSpecifies "how"Focus on "what"
Vague termsNot measurableAdd specific metrics
Wrong pattern keywordSemantic confusionMatch pattern to behavior

Validation Checklist

Before finalizing an EARS requirement:

  • Uses "SHALL" (not should/must/will)
  • Uses active voice (entity does action)
  • Single behavior per statement
  • Testable with measurable criteria
  • Pattern keyword matches behavior type
  • No implementation details (what, not how)

Integration with Canonical Spec

EARS requirements map to canonical specification:

requirements:
  - id: "REQ-001"
    text: "WHEN a user submits the form, the system SHALL validate inputs"
    priority: must
    ears_type: event-driven  # Matches pattern used
    acceptance_criteria:
      - id: "AC-001"
        given: "a user on the form page"
        when: "the user clicks submit"
        then: "the system validates all inputs"

References

Detailed Documentation:

Related Skills:

  • canonical-spec-format - Canonical specification structure
  • spec-management - Specification workflow navigation
  • requirements-quality - INVEST criteria and quality assessment

Last Updated: 2025-12-24

Version History

  • v1.0.0 (2025-12-26): Initial release

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

34.86%
按下载量换算23

Claude

30.63%
按下载量换算20

Cursor

18.65%
按下载量换算12

Gemini CLI

10.49%
按下载量换算7

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