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

frappe-agent-architect冰沙 Agent 建筑师

Agent Skill

frappe-agent-architect 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

642

周安装

27

GitHub Stars

87

下载量

225
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:frappe-agent-architect(冰沙 Agent 建筑师)
来源仓库:https://github.com/openaec-foundation/erpnext_anthropic_claude_development_skill_package
仓库路径:skills/frappe-agent-architect
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/openaec-foundation/erpnext_anthropic_claude_development_skill_package --skill frappe-agent-architect
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/openaec-foundation/erpnext_anthropic_claude_development_skill_package --skill frappe-agent-architect

简介

用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue 和 Pull Request 协作信息。

  • 支持代码变更追踪、仓库状态整理和协作事项归纳,提升开发效率。
  • 可结合原始 README 和安装命令进一步验证功能细节和使用限制。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发不必要的网络请求。
  • 使用时需注意信息时效性,优先基于最新提交和历史记录进行分析。

SKILL.md

Multi-App Architecture Agent

Designs Frappe/ERPNext multi-app architectures by analyzing business requirements, deciding app boundaries, and generating implementation roadmaps.

Purpose: Make the right architecture decisions BEFORE writing code — prevent costly refactoring later.

When to Use This Agent

ARCHITECTURE TRIGGER
|
+-- New project with multiple modules
|   "We need CRM, inventory, and custom billing"
|   --> USE THIS AGENT
|
+-- Deciding whether to extend ERPNext or build custom
|   "Should we customize Sales Invoice or create our own DocType?"
|   --> USE THIS AGENT
|
+-- Multiple teams building on same Frappe instance
|   "Team A does HR, Team B does manufacturing"
|   --> USE THIS AGENT
|
+-- Existing monolith needs splitting
|   "Our single custom app has 50 DocTypes"
|   --> USE THIS AGENT
|
+-- Cross-app communication needed
|   "App A needs to react when App B creates a document"
|   --> USE THIS AGENT

Architecture Workflow

STEP 1: ANALYZE REQUIREMENTS
  Business needs → DocTypes, workflows, integrations

STEP 2: DECIDE APP BOUNDARIES
  Single app vs multiple apps decision framework

STEP 3: DESIGN CROSS-APP DEPENDENCIES
  required_apps, shared DocTypes, hook contracts

STEP 4: DESIGN DATA MODEL
  DocTypes, relationships, naming conventions

STEP 5: GENERATE IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP
  Build order, milestones, team assignments

See references/workflow.md for detailed steps.

Step 1: Requirement Analysis Matrix

Map each business requirement to Frappe mechanisms:

Requirement TypeFrappe MechanismExample
Data storageDocType"Track customer contracts"
Business rulesController/Server Script"Auto-calculate totals"
Approval flowWorkflow"Manager must approve orders >10k"
Scheduled tasksScheduler/hooks.py"Daily report email"
External syncIntegration/API"Sync with Shopify"
Custom UIClient Script/Page"Dashboard for warehouse"
ReportsScript Report/Query Report"Monthly sales by region"
PermissionsRole Permission"Sales team sees own data only"
Print outputPrint Format (Jinja)"Custom invoice layout"
Portal accessWebsite/Portal"Customer can view orders"

Step 2: App Boundary Decision Framework

Single App: Use When

  • Total DocTypes < 15
  • Single team maintains the code
  • All DocTypes share the same business domain
  • No plans to distribute/sell components separately
  • All DocTypes have tight data dependencies

Multiple Apps: Use When

  • Total DocTypes > 15
  • Multiple teams with separate release cycles
  • Clear domain boundaries exist (HR vs Manufacturing vs CRM)
  • Components may be installed independently
  • Some modules are reusable across projects
  • Different licensing needs per module

Decision Tree

HOW MANY DOCTYPES?
|
+-- < 15 total
|   +-- Single domain? --> SINGLE APP
|   +-- Multiple domains? --> Consider splitting
|
+-- 15-30 total
|   +-- Tight coupling between all? --> SINGLE APP (with modules)
|   +-- Clear domain boundaries? --> 2-3 APPS
|
+-- > 30 total
|   --> ALWAYS SPLIT into multiple apps
|       Group by domain/team/release cycle

See references/decision-tree.md for the complete decision framework.

Step 3: Cross-App Dependency Patterns

required_apps Declaration

ALWAYS declare dependencies explicitly in hooks.py:

# myapp/hooks.py
required_apps = ["frappe", "erpnext"]  # NEVER omit frappe

Dependency Rules

  • NEVER create circular dependencies (App A requires App B requires App A)
  • ALWAYS declare ALL dependencies (direct and indirect)
  • ALWAYS put shared/base apps first in required_apps
  • NEVER depend on a specific version — use compatible APIs only

Dependency Diagram Pattern

frappe (base framework)
  └── erpnext (ERP modules)
       ├── custom_manufacturing (extends Manufacturing)
       └── custom_crm (extends CRM)
            └── crm_analytics (extends custom_crm)

RULE: Dependencies flow DOWN only. Never up, never sideways.

Cross-App Communication Patterns

PatternMechanismUse When
Hook Eventsdoc_events in hooks.pyApp B reacts to App A's documents
Shared DocTypeLink fields to other app's DocTypesApps share reference data
API Callfrappe.call() to whitelisted methodLoose coupling between apps
Custom Fieldsfixtures with Custom FieldExtend another app's DocType without modifying it
Overrideextend_doctype_class (v16) or doc_eventsModify another app's behavior
Signalsfrappe.publish_realtime()Real-time notifications between apps

Step 4: Data Model Design

DocType Relationship Types

RelationshipImplementationExample
One-to-ManyChild Table DocTypeInvoice → Invoice Items
Many-to-OneLink fieldInvoice → Customer
Many-to-ManyLink DocType (intermediary)Student → Course (via Enrollment)
One-to-OneLink field + unique validationEmployee → User
Self-referentialLink to same DocTypeEmployee → Reports To (Employee)

Naming Conventions

ElementConventionExample
App namelowercase, underscorescustom_manufacturing
DocType nameTitle Case, spacesProduction Order
Field namelowercase, underscoresproduction_date
Controllersnake_case filenameproduction_order.py
ModuleTitle CaseManufacturing

Data Model Rules

  • NEVER duplicate data that exists in another DocType — use Link fields
  • ALWAYS define autoname/naming_series for every DocType
  • ALWAYS add created_by and modified_by awareness (built-in)
  • NEVER use Data fields for references — use Link fields
  • ALWAYS set mandatory fields for data integrity
  • ALWAYS define permissions at DocType level

App Composition Patterns

Pattern 1: Base + Vertical

base_app (shared DocTypes, utilities)
├── vertical_retail (retail-specific DocTypes)
├── vertical_manufacturing (manufacturing-specific DocTypes)
└── vertical_services (services-specific DocTypes)

Use when: Building industry-specific solutions on shared foundation.

Pattern 2: Core + Extensions

erpnext (standard ERP)
├── custom_fields_app (Custom Fields only, no DocTypes)
├── custom_reports_app (Script Reports and dashboards)
└── custom_workflows_app (Workflows and automation)

Use when: Extending ERPNext without modifying core. Keeps upgrades clean.

Pattern 3: Shared Utilities

frappe_utils (shared library: PDF generation, email templates, etc.)
├── app_crm (uses frappe_utils)
├── app_hr (uses frappe_utils)
└── app_projects (uses frappe_utils)

Use when: Multiple apps need the same utility functions.

Pattern 4: Marketplace App

standalone_app (zero dependencies beyond frappe)
├── Works on any Frappe site
├── Self-contained DocTypes and logic
└── Optional ERPNext integration via hooks

Use when: Building for distribution/sale on Frappe marketplace.

ERPNext Extension Patterns

Custom Fields vs Custom DocTypes vs Override

ApproachUse WhenProsCons
Custom FieldsAdding 1-10 fields to existing DocTypeSurvives upgrades, no codeLimited logic, UI clutter
Custom DocTypeNew business entity not in ERPNextFull control, clean designNo built-in ERPNext logic
Controller OverrideModifying existing ERPNext behaviorFull Python accessFragile on upgrades
Server ScriptSimple validation/automationNo custom app neededSandbox limitations
Client ScriptUI customizationNo custom app neededJS only, no server logic

Extension Decision Rules

  • ALWAYS prefer Custom Fields for < 10 additional fields
  • ALWAYS prefer Server Script for simple validations
  • NEVER override ERPNext controllers unless absolutely necessary
  • ALWAYS use extend_doctype_class (v16) over doc_events for overrides
  • NEVER modify ERPNext source files directly — ALWAYS use hooks or extensions

Common Architecture Mistakes

MistakeWhy It FailsCorrect Approach
Circular app dependenciesInstall/update breaksRestructure dependency tree
One mega-app with 50+ DocTypesUnmaintainable, slow testsSplit by domain into 3-5 apps
Duplicating ERPNext DocTypesData inconsistency, double maintenanceExtend with Custom Fields + hooks
No required_apps declarationSilent failures on fresh installALWAYS declare all dependencies
Shared database tables between appsTight coupling, migration conflictsUse Link fields and API calls
Modifying ERPNext source filesLost on every upgradeUse hooks, Custom Fields, extensions
No module organization within appFiles scattered, hard to navigateGroup DocTypes into modules
Hardcoded site/company namesBreaks on multi-site/multi-companyUse frappe.defaults and filters

Agent Output Format

ALWAYS produce architecture output in this format:

## Architecture Design

### Requirements Summary
| # | Requirement | DocTypes | Mechanism |
|---|------------|----------|-----------|

### App Structure
[Diagram showing apps and dependencies]

### App Inventory
| App | Module(s) | DocTypes | Dependencies |
|-----|-----------|----------|-------------|

### Data Model
| DocType | App | Key Fields | Relationships |
|---------|-----|------------|---------------|

### Cross-App Communication
| Source App | Target App | Mechanism | Trigger |
|-----------|-----------|-----------|---------|

### ERPNext Extensions
| Extension Type | Target DocType | Purpose |
|---------------|---------------|---------|

### Implementation Roadmap
| Phase | App(s) | Deliverables | Dependencies |
|-------|--------|-------------|-------------|

### Risk Assessment
| Risk | Mitigation |
|------|-----------|

### Referenced Skills
- `frappe-syntax-customapp`: App structure
- `frappe-syntax-hooks`: Hook configuration
- `frappe-syntax-doctypes`: DocType definition
- `frappe-impl-customapp`: App development workflow

See references/decision-tree.md for complete decision frameworks. See references/examples.md for architecture design examples.

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

35.81%
按下载量换算81

Claude

31.71%
按下载量换算71

Cursor

17.16%
按下载量换算39

Gemini CLI

9.44%
按下载量换算21

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