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提醒

extractwisdomextractwisdom 搜索

Agent Skill

extractwisdom 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

1,697

周安装

70

GitHub Stars

11,786

下载量

554
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:extractwisdom(extractwisdom 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/danielmiessler/personal_ai_infrastructure
仓库路径:skills/extractwisdom
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/danielmiessler/personal_ai_infrastructure --skill ExtractWisdom
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/danielmiessler/personal_ai_infrastructure --skill ExtractWisdom

简介

用于动态检测内容中的智慧主题并构建定制化知识卡片。

  • 支持从编程面试、产品策略等场景中自动划分 Ideas、Strategies 等小节。
  • 输出格式灵活,可根据实际内容调整章节结构和条目密度。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围,注意依赖外部资源获取和内容解析能力。
  • extractwisdom 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Customization

Before executing, check for user customizations at: ~/.claude/PAI/USER/SKILLCUSTOMIZATIONS/ExtractWisdom/

If this directory exists, load and apply any PREFERENCES.md, configurations, or resources found there. These override default behavior. If the directory does not exist, proceed with skill defaults.

ExtractWisdom — Dynamic Content Extraction

The next generation of extract_wisdom. Instead of static sections (IDEAS, QUOTES, HABITS...), this skill detects what wisdom domains actually exist in the content and builds custom sections around them.

A programming interview gets "Programming Philosophy" and "Developer Workflow Tips." A business podcast gets "Contrarian Business Takes" and "Money Philosophy." A security talk gets "Threat Model Insights" and "Defense Strategies." The sections adapt because the content dictates them.

When to Use

  • Analyzing YouTube videos, podcasts, interviews, articles
  • User says "extract wisdom", "what's interesting in this", "key takeaways"
  • Processing any content where you want to capture the best stuff
  • When standard extraction patterns miss the gems

Depth Levels

Extract at different depths depending on need. Default is Full if no level is specified.

LevelSectionsBullets/SectionClosing SectionsWhen
Instant18NoneQuick hit. One killer section.
Fast33NoneSkim in 30 seconds.
Basic35One-Sentence Takeaway onlySolid overview without the deep cuts.
Full5-123-15All threeThe default. Complete extraction.
Comprehensive10-158-15All three + Themes & ConnectionsMaximum depth. Nothing left behind.

How to invoke: "extract wisdom (fast)" or "extract wisdom at comprehensive level" or just "extract wisdom" for Full.

Comprehensive extras:

  • Themes & Connections closing section: identify 3-5 throughlines that connect multiple sections. Not summaries — the deeper patterns the speaker may not even realize they're revealing.
  • Prioritize breadth. Every significant wisdom domain gets its own section.
  • No merging sections to save space. If the content supports 15 sections, use 15.

All levels use the same voice, tone rules, and quality standards. The only thing that changes is structure. An Instant extraction should hit just as hard per-bullet as a Comprehensive one.

Workflow Routing

WorkflowTriggerFile
Extract"extract wisdom from", "analyze this", YouTube URLWorkflows/Extract.md

The Core Idea

Old extract_wisdom: Static sections. Same headers every time. IDEAS. QUOTES. HABITS. FACTS.

This skill: Read the content first. Figure out what's actually in there. Build sections around what you find.

The output should feel like your smartest friend watched/read the thing and is telling you about it over coffee. Not a book report. Not documentation. A real person pointing out the parts that made them go "holy shit" or "wait, that's actually brilliant."

Tone Rules (CRITICAL)

Canonical voice reference: PAI/USER/WRITINGSTYLE.md — read this file for the full voice definition. The bullets should sound like {PRINCIPAL.NAME} telling a friend about it over coffee. Not compressed info nuggets. Not clever one-liners. Actual spoken observations.

THREE LEVELS — we're aiming for Level 3:

Level 1 (BAD — documentation):

  • The speaker discussed the importance of self-modifying software in the context of agentic AI development
  • It was noted that financial success has diminishing returns beyond a certain threshold
  • The distinction between "vibe coding" and "agentic engineering" was emphasized as meaningful

Level 2 (BETTER — but still "smart bullet points"):

  • He built self-modifying software basically by accident — just made the agent aware of its own source code
  • Money has diminishing returns. A cheeseburger is a cheeseburger no matter how rich you are.
  • "Vibe coding is a slur" — he calls it agentic engineering, and only does vibe coding after 3am

Level 3 (YES — this is what we want — conversational, {PRINCIPAL.NAME}'s voice):

  • He wasn't trying to build self-modifying software. He just let the agent see its own source code and it started fixing itself.
  • Past a certain point, money stops mattering. A cheeseburger is a cheeseburger no matter how rich you are.
  • He calls vibe coding a slur. What he does is agentic engineering. The vibe coding only happens after 3am, and he regrets it in the morning.

The difference between Level 2 and 3: Level 2 is compressed info with em-dashes. Level 3 is how you'd actually SAY it. Varied sentence lengths. Letting a thought breathe. Not trying to be clever — just being clear and direct and a little bit personal.

Key signals of Level 3:

  • Reads naturally when spoken aloud
  • Varied sentence lengths — some short, some longer
  • Understated — lets the content carry the weight
  • Uses periods, not em-dashes, to let ideas land
  • Feels opinionated ("Past a certain point, money stops mattering") not just informational
  • The reader should think "I want to watch this" not "I got the summary"

Rules for Extracted Points

  1. Write like you'd say it. Read each bullet aloud. If it sounds like a press release or a compressed tweet, rewrite it. If it sounds like you telling a friend what you just watched, you nailed it.
  2. 8-16 words per sentence. This is the target range. Mix short (8-10) with medium (11-14) and longer (15-16). Don't make them all the same length. Exception: verbatim quotes can be any length since they're the speaker's actual words.
  3. Let ideas breathe. Use periods between thoughts, not em-dashes. Short sentences. Then a slightly longer one to explain. That's the rhythm.
  4. Include the actual detail. Not "he talked about money" but "a cheeseburger is a cheeseburger no matter how rich you are."
  5. Use the speaker's words when they're good. If they said something perfectly, use it.
  6. No hedging language. Not "it was suggested that" or "the speaker noted." Just say the thing.
  7. Capture what made you stop. Every bullet should be something worth telling someone about.
  8. Vary your openers. Don't start three bullets the same way. And don't front-load with "He" — if more than 3 bullets in a section start with the speaker's name, you're writing a biography.
  9. Capture the human moments. Burnout stories, moments of doubt, something that moved them. That's wisdom too. Don't skip it because it's not "technical."
  10. Insight over inventory. "He uses Go for CLIs" is inventory. "He picked a language he doesn't even like because the ecosystem fits agents perfectly. That's the new normal." is insight. Go deeper.
  11. Specificity is everything. "He was impressed by the agent" = bad. "The agent found ffmpeg, curled the Whisper API, and transcribed a voice message nobody taught it to handle" = good.
  12. Tension and surprise. The best bullets have a contradiction or reversal. "Every VC is offering hundreds of millions. He genuinely doesn't care." The gap between the offer and the indifference IS the wisdom.
  13. Understated, not clever. Let the content carry the weight. You don't need to manufacture drama or craft the perfect one-liner. Just state what's interesting plainly and move on.

How Dynamic Sections Work

Phase 1: Content Scan

Read/listen to the full content. As you go, notice what DOMAINS of wisdom are present. These aren't the topics discussed — they're the TYPES of insight being delivered.

Examples of wisdom domains (these are illustrative, not exhaustive):

  • Programming Philosophy (how to think about code, not specific syntax)
  • Developer Workflow (practical tips for how to work)
  • Business/Money Philosophy (unconventional takes on money, success, building companies)
  • Human Psychology (insights about how people think, behave, learn)
  • Technology Predictions (where things are headed)
  • Life Philosophy (how to live, what matters)
  • Contrarian Takes (things that go against conventional wisdom)
  • First-Time Revelations (things you're hearing for the first time — genuinely new)
  • Technical Architecture (how something is built, design decisions)
  • Leadership & Team Dynamics (managing people, working with others)
  • Creative Process (how to make things, craft, art)

Phase 2: Section Selection

Pick sections based on depth level (default Full = 5-12). Requirements:

  • Section count follows depth level table. Full = 5-12, Comprehensive = 10-15, Basic/Fast = 3, Instant = 1.
  • Each section must have at least 3 STRONG bullets to justify existing (except Fast, where 3 tight bullets IS the section). If you can only scrape together 2 weak ones, merge into a related section.
  • Always include "Quotes That Hit Different" if the content has good ones
  • Always include "First-Time Revelations" if there are genuinely new ideas — things you literally didn't know before
  • Section names should be conversational, not academic. "Money Philosophy" not "Financial Considerations"
  • Sections should be SPECIFIC to this content. Generic sections = failure.
  • Kill inventory sections. If a section is just a list of facts ("uses X for Y, uses A for B"), it's not wisdom. Either go deeper on WHY those choices matter or merge the facts into a section about the underlying philosophy.
  • Don't split what belongs together. If "burnout recovery" and "money philosophy" are actually both about "what success really means," make one richer section instead of two thin ones.
  • Name sections like a magazine editor. "The Death of 80% of Apps" is great. "Technology Predictions" is not. The section name itself should make you curious. It's a headline, not a category.
  • Surprise density per section. If a section has 6+ bullets but only 2 are genuinely surprising, kill the padding and keep the winners. Quality > quantity per section.
  • Don't drop your best material between drafts. If a spicy take, stunning moment, or first-time revelation was identified in an earlier pass, it MUST survive into the final version. Losing great material is worse than adding mediocre material.

Phase 3: Extraction

For each section, extract 3-15 bullets depending on density. Apply all tone rules. Every bullet earns its place.

The Spiciest Take Rule: If the speaker has a genuinely contrarian or hot take on a topic (e.g., "screw MCPs", "X is dead", "Y is overhyped"), that take MUST appear somewhere. Spicy takes are the most memorable, shareable, and valuable parts of any content. Don't water them down. Don't leave them out.

The "Would I Tweet This?" Test: After extraction, scan your bullets. If fewer than half would make a good standalone tweet or social media post, your bullets are too generic. The best extractions are effectively a thread of tweetable insights.

Phase 4: Closing Sections (Depth-Level Dependent)

Which closing sections to include depends on depth level:

LevelClosing Sections
InstantNone
FastNone
BasicOne-Sentence Takeaway only
FullOne-Sentence Takeaway + If You Only Have 2 Minutes + References & Rabbit Holes
ComprehensiveAll three above + Themes & Connections

One-Sentence Takeaway The single most important thing from the entire piece in 15-20 words.

If You Only Have 2 Minutes The 5-7 absolute must-know points. The cream of the cream.

References & Rabbit Holes People, projects, books, tools, and ideas mentioned that are worth following up on. Brief context for each.

Themes & Connections (Comprehensive only) 3-5 throughlines that connect multiple sections. The deeper patterns the speaker may not realize they're revealing. Not summaries. Synthesis.

Output Format

# EXTRACT WISDOM: {Content Title}
> {One-line description of what this is and who's talking}

---

## {Dynamic Section 1 Name}

- {bullet}
- {bullet}
- {bullet}

## {Dynamic Section 2 Name}

- {bullet}
- {bullet}

[... more dynamic sections ...]

---

## One-Sentence Takeaway

{15-20 word sentence}

## If You Only Have 2 Minutes

- {essential point 1}
- {essential point 2}
- {essential point 3}
- {essential point 4}
- {essential point 5}

## References & Rabbit Holes

- **{Name/Project}** — {one-line context of why it's worth looking into}
- **{Name/Project}** — {context}

Quality Check

Before delivering output, verify:

  • Sections are specific to THIS content, not generic
  • No bullet sounds like it was written by a committee
  • Every bullet has a specific detail, quote, or insight — not vague summaries
  • Section names are conversational and headline-worthy (not category labels)
  • Section count matches depth level (Instant=1, Fast/Basic=3, Full=5-12, Comprehensive=10-15)
  • Closing sections match depth level (see Phase 4 table)
  • No bullet starts with "The speaker" or "It was noted that"
  • No more than 3 bullets per section start with "He" or the speaker's name
  • No bullet exceeds 25 words
  • No inventory sections (just listing facts without insight)
  • "If You Only Have 2 Minutes" bullets are each under 20 words
  • Reading the output makes you want to consume the original content

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

39.62%
按下载量换算219

Claude

27.62%
按下载量换算153

Cursor

18.68%
按下载量换算103

Gemini CLI

9.28%
按下载量换算51

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

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。来源安全扫描存在 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。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