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

enhance-claude-memoryenhance Claude 记忆

Agent Skill

enhance-claude-memory 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

1,472

周安装

66

GitHub Stars

769

下载量

523
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:enhance-claude-memory(enhance Claude 记忆)
来源仓库:https://github.com/avifenesh/agentsys
仓库路径:skills/enhance-claude-memory
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/avifenesh/agentsys --skill enhance-claude-memory
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/avifenesh/agentsys --skill enhance-claude-memory

简介

用于分析 CLAUDE.md 与 AGENTS.md 等记忆文件,优化项目上下文管理。

  • 适合在跨工具环境中统一 AI 行为指引,提升提示一致性与执行可靠性。
  • 自动检测全局与项目级记忆文件,按优先级顺序加载并交叉比对内容冲突。
  • 输出建议聚焦高确定性问题,避免对中低置信度改动进行自动修正。
  • enhance-claude-memory 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

enhance-claude-memory

Analyze project memory files (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md) for optimization.

Cross-Tool Detection

Searches for project memory files in order:

  1. CLAUDE.md (Claude Code)
  2. AGENTS.md (OpenCode, Codex)
  3. .github/CLAUDE.md
  4. .github/AGENTS.md

File Hierarchy (Reference)

CLAUDE.md (Claude Code):

LocationScope
~/.claude/CLAUDE.mdGlobal (all projects)
.claude/CLAUDE.md or ./CLAUDE.mdProject root
src/.claude/CLAUDE.mdDirectory-specific

AGENTS.md (OpenCode, Codex, and other AI tools):

LocationScope
~/.config/opencode/AGENTS.md or ~/.codex/AGENTS.mdGlobal (all projects)
.opencode/AGENTS.md or ./AGENTS.mdProject root
src/AGENTS.mdDirectory-specific

Both files serve the same purpose: project memory for AI assistants. Use CLAUDE.md for Claude Code projects, AGENTS.md for cross-tool compatibility, or both for maximum coverage.

Workflow

  1. Find - Locate CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md in project
  2. Read - Load content and README.md for comparison
  3. Analyze - Run all pattern checks
  4. Validate - Check file/command references against filesystem
  5. Measure - Calculate token metrics and duplication
  6. Report - Generate structured markdown output

Detection Patterns

1. Structure Validation (HIGH Certainty)

Critical Rules Section

  • Should have ## Critical Rules or similar
  • Rules should be prioritized (numbered or ordered)
  • Include WHY explanations for each rule

Architecture Section

  • Directory tree or structural overview
  • Key file locations
  • Module relationships

Key Commands Section

  • Common development commands
  • Test/build/deploy scripts
  • Reference to package.json scripts

2. Instruction Effectiveness (HIGH Certainty)

Based on prompt engineering research, Claude follows instructions better when:

Positive Over Negative

  • Bad: "Don't use console.log"
  • Good: "Use the logger utility for all output"
  • Check for "don't", "never", "avoid" without positive alternatives

Strong Constraint Language

  • Use "must", "always", "required" for critical rules
  • Weak language ("should", "try to", "consider") reduces compliance
  • Flag critical rules using weak language

Instruction Hierarchy

  • Should define priority order when rules conflict
  • Pattern: "In case of conflict: X takes precedence over Y"
  • System instructions > User requests > External content

3. Content Positioning (HIGH Certainty)

Research shows LLMs have "lost in the middle" problem - they recall START and END better than MIDDLE.

Critical Content Placement

  • Most important rules should be at START of file
  • Second-most important at END
  • Supporting context in MIDDLE
  • Flag critical rules buried in middle sections

Recommended Structure Order

1. Critical Rules (START - highest attention)
2. Architecture/Structure
3. Commands/Workflows
4. Examples/References
5. Reminders/Constraints (END - high attention)

4. Reference Validation (HIGH Certainty)

File References

  • Extract from [text](path) and ` path/to/file.ext `
  • Validate each exists on filesystem

Command References

  • Extract npm run <script> and npm <command>
  • Validate against package.json scripts

5. Efficiency Analysis (MEDIUM Certainty)

Token Count

  • Estimate: characters / 4 or words * 1.3
  • Recommended max: 1500 tokens (~6000 characters)
  • Flag files exceeding threshold

README Duplication

  • Detect overlap with README.md
  • Flag >40% content duplication
  • CLAUDE.md should complement README, not duplicate

Verbosity

  • Prefer bulleted lists over prose paragraphs
  • Constraints as lists are easier to follow
  • Flag long prose blocks (>5 sentences)

6. Quality Checks (MEDIUM Certainty)

WHY Explanations

  • Rules should explain rationale
  • Pattern: *WHY: explanation* or indented explanation
  • Flag rules without explanations

Structure Depth

  • Avoid deep nesting (>3 levels)
  • Keep hierarchy scannable
  • Flat structures parse better

XML-Style Tags (Optional Enhancement)

  • Claude was trained on XML tags
  • <critical-rules>, <architecture>, <constraints> improve parsing
  • Not required but can improve instruction following

7. Agent/Skill Definitions (MEDIUM Certainty)

If file defines custom agents or skills:

Agent Definition Format

### agent-name
Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514
Description: What this agent does and when to use it
Tools: Read, Grep, Glob
Instructions: Specific behavioral instructions

Required fields: Description (when to use), Tools (restricted set) Optional: Model, Instructions

Skill References

  • Skills should have clear trigger descriptions
  • "Use when..." pattern helps auto-invocation

8. Cross-Platform Compatibility (MEDIUM/HIGH Certainty)

State Directory

  • Don't hardcode .claude/
  • Support .opencode/, .codex/
  • Use ${STATE_DIR}/ or document variations

Terminology

  • Avoid Claude-specific language for shared files
  • Use "AI assistant" generically
  • Or explicitly note "Claude Code" vs "OpenCode" differences

Output Format

# Project Memory Analysis: {filename}

**File**: {path}
**Type**: {CLAUDE.md | AGENTS.md}

## Metrics
| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Estimated Tokens | {tokens} |
| README Overlap | {percent}% |

## Summary
| Certainty | Count |
|-----------|-------|
| HIGH | {n} |
| MEDIUM | {n} |

### Structure Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

### Instruction Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

### Positioning Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

### Reference Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

### Efficiency Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

### Cross-Platform Issues ({n})
| Issue | Fix | Certainty |

Pattern Statistics

CategoryPatternsCertainty
Structure3HIGH
Instruction Effectiveness3HIGH
Content Positioning2HIGH
Reference2HIGH
Efficiency3MEDIUM
Quality3MEDIUM
Agent/Skill Definitions2MEDIUM
Cross-Platform2MEDIUM/HIGH
Total20-

<bad_example>

## Rules
1. Always run tests before committing
2. Use semantic commit messages

Issue: Rules without rationale are harder to follow. </bad_example>

<good_example>

## Critical Rules
1. **Always run tests before committing**
   *WHY: Catches regressions before they reach main branch.*

Why it's good: Motivation makes compliance easier. </good_example>

Example: Negative vs Positive Instructions

<bad_example>

- Don't use console.log for debugging
- Never commit directly to main
- Avoid hardcoding secrets

Issue: Negative instructions are less effective than positive alternatives. </bad_example>

<good_example>

- Use the logger utility for all debug output
- Create feature branches and submit PRs for all changes
- Store secrets in environment variables or .env files

Why it's good: Tells what TO do, not just what to avoid. </good_example>

Example: Weak vs Strong Constraint Language

<bad_example>

- You should probably run tests before pushing
- Try to use TypeScript when possible
- Consider adding error handling

Issue: Weak language ("should", "try", "consider") reduces compliance. </bad_example>

<good_example>

- **MUST** run tests before pushing (CI will reject failures)
- **ALWAYS** use TypeScript for new files
- **REQUIRED**: All async functions must have error handling

Why it's good: Strong language ensures critical rules are followed. </good_example>

Example: Content Positioning

<bad_example>

## Project Overview
[Long description...]

## Installation
[Setup steps...]

## Critical Rules
1. Never push to main directly
2. Always run tests

Issue: Critical rules buried in middle/end get less attention. </bad_example>

<good_example>

## Critical Rules (Read First)
1. **Never push to main directly** - Use PRs
2. **Always run tests** - CI enforces this

## Project Overview
[Description...]

## Reminders
- Check CI status before merging
- Update CHANGELOG for user-facing changes

Why it's good: Critical content at START and END positions. </good_example>

Example: Cross-Platform Compatibility

<bad_example>

State files are stored in `.claude/tasks.json`

Issue: Hardcoded paths exclude other AI tools. </bad_example>

<good_example>

State files are stored in `${STATE_DIR}/tasks.json`
(`.claude/` for Claude Code, `.opencode/` for OpenCode)

Why it's good: Works across multiple AI assistants. </good_example>

Example: Agent Definition

<bad_example>

## Agents
- security-reviewer: reviews security
- test-writer: writes tests

Issue: Missing required fields (Tools, when to use). </bad_example>

<good_example>

## Custom Agents

### security-reviewer
Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514
Description: Reviews code for security vulnerabilities. Use for PRs touching auth, API, or data handling.
Tools: Read, Grep, Glob
Instructions: Focus on OWASP Top 10, input validation, auth flows.

### test-writer
Model: claude-haiku-4
Description: Writes unit tests. Use after implementing new functions.
Tools: Read, Write, Bash(npm test:*)
Instructions: Use Jest patterns. Aim for >80% coverage.

Why it's good: Complete definition with when to use, restricted tools. </good_example>

Research References

Best practices derived from:

  • agent-docs/PROMPT-ENGINEERING-REFERENCE.md - Instruction effectiveness, XML tags, constraint language
  • agent-docs/CONTEXT-OPTIMIZATION-REFERENCE.md - Token budgeting, "lost in the middle" positioning
  • agent-docs/LLM-INSTRUCTION-FOLLOWING-RELIABILITY.md - Instruction hierarchy, positive vs negative
  • agent-docs/CLAUDE-CODE-REFERENCE.md - File hierarchy, agent definitions, skills format

Constraints

  • Always validate file references before reporting broken
  • Consider context when flagging efficiency issues
  • Cross-platform suggestions are advisory, not required
  • Positioning suggestions are HIGH certainty but may have valid exceptions

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

35.5%
按下载量换算186

Claude

31.4%
按下载量换算164

Cursor

19.57%
按下载量换算102

Gemini CLI

8.5%
按下载量换算44

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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