Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索操作浏览器github未标认证来源可访问clear审计通过

intent-plan意向计划

Agent Skill

intent-plan 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

2,093

周安装

89

GitHub Stars

12

下载量

733
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:intent-plan(意向计划)
来源仓库:https://github.com/arcblock/idd
仓库路径:skills/intent-plan
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/arcblock/idd --skill intent-plan
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/arcblock/idd --skill intent-plan

简介

用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果。

  • 支持从来源仓库获取上下文,结合安装命令和原始 README 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。
  • 适用于需要快速获取信息或背景知识的场景,提升研究效率。
  • 建议在提示词中明确搜索范围和筛选条件,避免无关结果干扰。

SKILL.md

Intent Plan

Transform an approved Intent into a structured, executable development plan with strict TDD discipline.

Output is TaskSwarm-compatible: The generated plan.md can be directly executed by /swarm run.

Core Principles

  1. Test First, Always: Every implementation step starts with writing tests
  2. Phased Execution: Break work into phases with clear deliverables (0-indexed)
  3. Verification Gates: Each phase ends with e2e validation
  4. Automation Priority: Prefer CLI/script testing over manual/browser testing
  5. Checkbox Tracking: All tests use - [] format for progress tracking

Plan Structure

## Phase 0: [Phase Name]
├── ### Description
├── ### Tests
│   ├── #### Happy Path
│   │   └── - [ ] test case 1
│   ├── #### Bad Path (详尽列举)
│   │   └── - [ ] error case 1
│   ├── #### Edge Cases
│   │   └── - [ ] boundary case 1
│   ├── #### Security
│   │   └── - [ ] vulnerability test 1
│   ├── #### Data Leak
│   │   └── - [ ] leak prevention test 1
│   └── #### Data Damage
│       └── - [ ] integrity test 1
├── ### E2E Gate
│   └── CLI/Script 验证命令
└── ### Acceptance Criteria
    └── - [ ] criterion 1

## Phase 1: [Phase Name]
└── ...

Test Categories (6 Required)

Every phase MUST include tests from ALL 6 categories:

CategoryDescriptionExamples
Happy PathNormal expected usageValid inputs, correct sequences
Bad PathInvalid inputs, error conditionsWrong types, missing required fields, invalid states
Edge CasesBoundary conditionsEmpty inputs, max values, concurrent access
SecurityVulnerability preventionInjection attacks, auth bypass, privilege escalation
Data LeakInformation exposureSensitive data in logs, error messages, API responses
Data DamageData integrity protectionPartial writes, corruption, race conditions

Bad cases must be detailed and comprehensive. A good test suite has more failure tests than success tests.

Test Writing Discipline

  1. Tests First: Write ALL tests before any implementation
  2. Red-Green-Refactor: Run tests expecting failure, implement, verify pass
  3. No Skip: Every category must have at least one test case

Phase Gates: E2E Verification (Required)

Each phase MUST end with E2E verification. This is the gate that proves the phase is truly complete.

E2E Gate Requirements

  1. Automatable: Must be runnable via CLI/script, no manual steps
  2. Independent: Can run without human intervention
  3. Reproducible: Same inputs produce same outputs
  4. Fast Feedback: Fails quickly when something is wrong

Preferred: CLI/Script Testing

# Example: API verification
curl -X POST http://localhost:3000/api/resource \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"field": "value"}' | jq .

# Example: Database state check
psql -c "SELECT * FROM table WHERE condition"

# Example: File system verification
diff expected_output.json actual_output.json

# Example: Unit test suite
pnpm test -- --coverage

For Web Projects: Automation-Friendly Design

DO:
- Provide health check endpoints
- Return machine-parseable responses (JSON)
- Include test mode / seed data endpoints
- Design idempotent operations

DON'T:
- Require browser interaction for verification
- Depend on visual inspection
- Need manual clicking through UI

When Browser Testing is Unavoidable

If browser/headless testing is truly necessary:

  • Use Playwright/Puppeteer with script automation
  • Create dedicated test endpoints
  • Prefer API calls over UI interaction

Pre-Plan Gates (Mandatory)

Before generating any plan, ALL gates must pass. No exceptions.

/intent-plan
    ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Gate 1: Interview Check             │
│   ✗ → "先跑 /intent-interview"       │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
    ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Gate 2: Critique Check              │
│   ✗ → "先跑 /intent-critique"        │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
    ↓
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Gate 3: Dependency Check            │
│   ✗ → "前置任务未完成,无法 plan"    │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
    ↓
✓ All gates passed → Generate plan.md

Gate 1: Interview Check

Verify the Intent has been properly interviewed:

CheckHow to VerifyIf Failed
INTENT.md existsFile exists in intent directoryRun /intent-interview
Anchor existsFirst blockquote after title starts with >Add anchor statement
Within budgetwc -l INTENT.md ≤ 500 (warning at 300)Run /intent-critique to reduce if > 500
Structure completeHas Responsibilities, Structure, API sectionsRun /intent-interview
Not a stubContent is substantial, not placeholder textRun /intent-interview

Output if failed:

❌ Gate 1 Failed: Interview Incomplete

INTENT.md is missing or incomplete:
- [ ] Responsibilities section missing
- [ ] Structure diagram missing

Action required: Run /intent-interview first.

Gate 2: Critique Check

Verify the Intent has been critiqued for over-engineering:

CheckHow to VerifyIf Failed
Critique doneLook for critique markers or changelogRun /intent-critique
Post-modificationIf INTENT.md modified after last critiqueRun /intent-critique again
AI assessmentAsk AI if another critique round is neededRun /intent-critique if yes

Critique markers to look for:

  • <!-- critique: {date} --> comment in INTENT.md
  • critique.md or CRITIQUE.md in same directory
  • Changelog entry mentioning critique

Post-modification detection:

  • Compare INTENT.md mtime with critique marker date
  • If INTENT.md is newer AND has substantial changes → re-critique required

AI Assessment prompt:

"Based on this Intent, is there any sign of over-engineering, premature abstraction, or YAGNI violation that warrants another critique round?"

Output if failed:

❌ Gate 2 Failed: Critique Required

Intent has not been critiqued, or was modified after critique:
- Last critique: 2026-01-15
- INTENT.md modified: 2026-01-20 (substantial changes detected)

Action required: Run /intent-critique to review for over-engineering.

Gate 3: Dependency Check

Verify all prerequisites are satisfied:

CheckHow to VerifyIf Failed
Internal depsReferenced intents have status: done in TASK.yamlList blocking intents
External depsRequired packages/services existList missing dependencies
EnvironmentRequired env vars, credentials, accessList missing setup

How to find dependencies:

  1. Parse ## Prerequisites or ## Dependencies in INTENT.md
  2. Look for depends_on: in TASK.yaml (if exists)
  3. Scan for references like intent/other-feature/ or @package/name

Dependency states:

intent/auth/         → TASK.yaml status: done     ✓ OK
intent/database/     → TASK.yaml status: review   ✗ Blocked (not done)
intent/api/          → No TASK.yaml               ? Assume not started
@aigne/afs           → Check packages/ or deps    ✓/✗

Output if failed:

❌ Gate 3 Failed: Dependencies Not Ready

This Intent cannot be planned because prerequisites are incomplete:

Blocking Intents:
- intent/auth-module/ → status: in_progress (need: done)
- intent/database-setup/ → status: ready (need: done)

Missing External Dependencies:
- @aigne/session-protocol → not found in packages/

Action required: Complete blocking tasks first, or remove dependencies from INTENT.md if not actually needed.

Gate Pass Output

When all gates pass:

✓ Gate 1: Interview complete
✓ Gate 2: Critique done (2026-01-20), no re-critique needed
✓ Gate 3: All 2 dependencies satisfied

Proceeding to generate plan...

Workflow

/intent-plan
    ↓
Gate 1: Interview Check ──→ ✗ → Stop, require /intent-interview
    ↓ ✓
Gate 2: Critique Check ───→ ✗ → Stop, require /intent-critique
    ↓ ✓
Gate 3: Dependency Check ─→ ✗ → Stop, list blockers
    ↓ ✓
Read Intent file
    ↓
Analyze scope and complexity
    ↓
Identify logical phases (0-indexed)
    ↓
For each phase, define:
    - Description
    - Tests (6 categories)
    - E2E Gate
    - Acceptance Criteria
    ↓
Present plan for approval
    ↓
User confirms or adjusts
    ↓
Save to plan.md (same directory as INTENT.md)
    ↓
Create TASK.yaml (status: ready)

Output Files

1. plan.md (Required)

# Execution Plan: {task_name}

## Overview

简要说明这个任务要做什么。

## Prerequisites

- 前置条件
- 依赖的其他任务
- 需要的权限或资源

## Phase 0: {Phase Name}

### Description

这个阶段要完成什么,交付什么。

### Tests

#### Happy Path
- [ ] 测试正常流程 1: {具体描述}
- [ ] 测试正常流程 2: {具体描述}

#### Bad Path
- [ ] 无效输入: {具体场景}
- [ ] 缺失必填字段: {具体场景}
- [ ] 错误状态: {具体场景}
- [ ] 类型错误: {具体场景}

#### Edge Cases
- [ ] 空输入处理
- [ ] 最大值边界
- [ ] 并发访问

#### Security
- [ ] 注入攻击防护: {具体场景}
- [ ] 权限绕过防护: {具体场景}
- [ ] 输入验证: {具体场景}

#### Data Leak
- [ ] 错误信息不泄露敏感数据
- [ ] 日志不包含敏感信息
- [ ] API 响应不过度暴露

#### Data Damage
- [ ] 部分写入恢复
- [ ] 竞态条件处理
- [ ] 事务完整性

### E2E Gate

Phase 完成验证脚本

{CLI commands to verify phase completion}


### Acceptance Criteria

- 所有 6 类测试通过
- E2E Gate 验证通过
- 代码已提交并 push

---

## Phase 1: {Phase Name}

### Description

下一阶段要完成什么。

### Tests

#### Happy Path

- 测试正常流程

#### Bad Path

- 测试错误处理 1
- 测试错误处理 2

#### Edge Cases

- 边界条件处理

#### Security

- 安全测试

#### Data Leak

- 泄露防护测试

#### Data Damage

- 数据完整性测试

### E2E Gate

Phase 1 验证脚本


### Acceptance Criteria

- 所有测试通过
- E2E Gate 验证通过

---

## Final E2E Verification

全系统端到端验证脚本

验证所有 Phase 的功能协同工作


## Risk Mitigation

| Risk | Mitigation | Contingency |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [风险 1] | [预防措施] | [发生时的应对] |

## References

- [相关 Intent](https://github.com/arcblock/idd/blob/HEAD/skills/intent-plan/./INTENT.md)
- [详细规格](https://github.com/arcblock/idd/blob/HEAD/skills/intent-plan/./spec.md) (如果存在)
- [设计文档](https://github.com/arcblock/idd/blob/HEAD/skills/intent-plan/./design.md) (如果存在)

2. TASK.yaml (Required)

status: ready
owner: null
assignee: null
phase: 0/{total_phases}
updated: {UTC_ISO_TIMESTAMP}
heartbeat: null

Important: {total_phases} is the number of phases in plan.md (0-indexed counting).

Integration with IDD & TaskSwarm

IDD Flow:
/intent-interview     # Create Intent (Gate 1 requirement)
    ↓
/intent-critique      # Review for over-engineering (Gate 2 requirement)
    ↓
/intent-review        # Approve Intent (optional but recommended)
    ↓
/intent-plan          # Gate checks → Generate plan.md + TASK.yaml (THIS SKILL)
    ↓
TaskSwarm Flow:
/swarm run            # Execute plan (TDD cycles)
    ↓
/swarm approve        # Human review
    ↓
/intent-sync          # Write back confirmed details

Gate enforcement ensures quality:

  • No plan without proper interview → avoids vague/incomplete specs
  • No plan without critique → avoids over-engineered designs
  • No plan with missing deps → avoids unexecutable plans

Tips for Good Plans

Format (TaskSwarm Compatible)

  1. 0-indexed phases: Phase 0, Phase 1, Phase 2...
  2. Checkbox format: All tests use - [] for progress tracking
  3. E2E Gate per phase: Each phase must have runnable verification

Test Quality

  1. All 6 categories required: Happy/Bad/Edge/Security/Data Leak/Data Damage
  2. Bad Path > Happy Path: More failure tests than success tests
  3. Specific test cases: "Test error handling" ✗ → "returns 404 when resource not found" ✓
  4. Security by default: Include even if not explicitly requested

Phase Design

  1. Right-size phases: Each phase completable in 1-3 days
  2. Clear dependencies: Note when phases depend on previous phases
  3. Automatable gates: E2E Gate must be runnable via CLI, no manual steps

Example: Complete Output

For an Intent at intent/session-protocol/INTENT.md:

Creates: intent/session-protocol/plan.md

# Execution Plan: session-protocol

## Overview

实现 Session Protocol 的 Frame 编解码功能。

## Prerequisites

- @aigne/afs 包已存在
- TypeScript 环境配置完成

## Phase 0: Frame Encoding

### Description

实现 Frame 的编码函数,将结构化数据转换为二进制格式。

### Tests

#### Happy Path
- [ ] encodes empty frame correctly
- [ ] encodes frame with JSON payload
- [ ] encodes frame with binary payload
- [ ] preserves ReqId across encode/decode

#### Bad Path
- [ ] throws on invalid frame type
- [ ] throws on payload exceeding max size
- [ ] throws on null payload when required
- [ ] throws on negative ReqId
- [ ] throws on non-integer frame type

#### Edge Cases
- [ ] handles empty string payload
- [ ] handles maximum allowed payload size (64KB)
- [ ] handles unicode in JSON payload
- [ ] handles zero-length binary payload

#### Security
- [ ] rejects frames with potential injection patterns
- [ ] validates frame type bounds (0-255)
- [ ] sanitizes string inputs before encoding

#### Data Leak
- [ ] error messages don't expose internal structure
- [ ] stack traces not included in thrown errors

#### Data Damage
- [ ] atomic write: partial encode doesn't corrupt buffer
- [ ] buffer overflow protection

### E2E Gate

Verify encoding works end-to-end

pnpm test -- --grep "Frame Encoding" pnpm test:e2e -- --grep "encode"


### Acceptance Criteria

- 所有 6 类测试通过
- E2E Gate 验证通过
- 100% 分支覆盖率
- 代码已提交

---

## Phase 1: Frame Decoding

### Description

实现 Frame 的解码函数,将二进制数据解析为结构化对象。

### Tests

#### Happy Path

- decodes valid frame correctly
- handles streaming decode
- decodes all frame types

#### Bad Path

- throws on truncated frame
- throws on corrupted header
- throws on invalid magic bytes
- throws on unsupported version

#### Edge Cases

- handles minimum valid frame
- handles maximum valid frame
- handles back-to-back frames in stream

#### Security

- validates frame length before allocation
- rejects oversized frames (DoS protection)

#### Data Leak

- doesn't expose raw bytes in error messages

#### Data Damage

- partial decode doesn't advance stream position
- corrupted frame doesn't affect subsequent frames

### E2E Gate

Verify full roundtrip

pnpm test -- --grep "Frame" echo '{"test":1}' | node scripts/encode-decode-test.js


### Acceptance Criteria

- 所有测试通过
- E2E roundtrip 验证通过
- 代码已提交

---

## Final E2E Verification

Full integration test

pnpm test pnpm test:e2e


## References

- [Intent](https://github.com/arcblock/idd/blob/HEAD/skills/intent-plan/./INTENT.md)
- [Spec](https://github.com/arcblock/idd/blob/HEAD/skills/intent-plan/./spec.md)

Creates: intent/session-protocol/TASK.yaml

status: ready
owner: null
assignee: null
phase: 0/2
updated: 2026-01-27T10:00:00Z
heartbeat: null

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

25.49%
按下载量换算187

Gemini CLI

21.64%
按下载量换算159

Codex

18.29%
按下载量换算134

Cursor

13.02%
按下载量换算95

OpenCode

6.72%
按下载量换算49

Antigravity

3.54%
按下载量换算26

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

操作浏览器

该 Skill 可能涉及浏览器控制能力,使用时可能读取或操作网页内容,需要在受控环境中确认权限边界。

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