Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索external-servicegithub未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

ln-812-optimization-researcherln 812 优化研究员

Agent Skill

ln-812-optimization-researcher 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

2,305

周安装

97

GitHub Stars

441

下载量

807
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:ln-812-optimization-researcher(ln 812 优化研究员)
来源仓库:https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills
仓库路径:skills/ln-812-optimization-researcher
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-812-optimization-researcher
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/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills --skill ln-812-optimization-researcher

简介

用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。ln-812-optimization-researcher 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

  • 适合根据关键词或任务场景快速定位候选结果。
  • 可结合来源仓库和原始 README 核验具体用法。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围和维护状态。
  • 注意是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。

SKILL.md

Paths: File paths (shared/, references/, ../ln-*) are relative to skills repo root. If not found at CWD, locate this SKILL.md directory and go up one level for repo root. If shared/ is missing, fetch files via WebFetch from https://raw.githubusercontent.com/levnikolaevich/claude-code-skills/master/skills/{path}.

ln-812-optimization-researcher

Type: L3 Worker Category: 8XX Optimization

Researches competitive benchmarks, industry standards, and solution approaches for bottlenecks identified by the profiler. Generates prioritized hypotheses for the executor.


Overview

AspectDetails
InputPerformance map from profiler (real measurements: baseline metrics, per-step timing, bottleneck classification, optimization hints)
OutputIndustry benchmarks, solution candidates, prioritized hypotheses (H1..H7)
PatternResearch-first: competitors → industry → local codebase → solutions → hypotheses

Workflow

Phases: Competitive Analysis → Bottleneck-Specific Research → Local Codebase Check → Hypothesis Generation → Research Report


Phase 1: Competitive Analysis

MANDATORY READ: Load shared/references/research_tool_fallback.md for MCP tool priority chain.

Goal

Establish what "good" looks like for this type of operation. Define target metric if user did not provide one.

Research Queries

GoalQuery TemplateTool
Industry benchmark"{domain} API response time benchmark {year}"WebSearch
Competitor performance"{competitor_type} {operation} latency"WebSearch
Standard expectations"acceptable response time for {operation_type}"WebSearch
Framework-specific guidance"{framework} {operation} performance best practices"Context7 / Ref

Output

FieldDescription
industry_benchmarkExpected performance range for this operation type
competitor_approachesHow top systems solve this (2-3 examples)
recommended_targetSuggested target metric (if user did not specify)
target_metricsPer-metric quantitative targets (see below)
sourcesURLs with dates for all findings

Target Metric Research

For each metric present in performance_map.baseline, research a quantitative target:

MetricQuery TemplateTool
wall_time_ms"{domain} API response time benchmark {year}"WebSearch
cpu_time_ms"{framework} handler CPU time benchmark"WebSearch
memory_peak_mb"{domain} API memory usage benchmark {year}"WebSearch
http_round_trips"{domain} API call count optimization best practice"WebSearch
io_bytes"{domain} file processing throughput benchmark"WebSearch

Output format:

target_metrics:
  wall_time_ms:
    value: 500
    source: "industry benchmark: translation APIs p95 200-500ms"
    confidence: HIGH
  http_round_trips:
    value: 2
    source: "best practice: batch API reduces N calls to 1-2"
    confidence: HIGH
  memory_peak_mb:
    value: 128
    source: "similar workload: 64-128MB typical"
    confidence: MEDIUM

Confidence levels: HIGH = benchmark found with source, MEDIUM = derived from best practices, LOW = estimated from general guidelines. Only include metrics present in the profiler baseline.


Phase 2: Bottleneck-Specific Research

MANDATORY READ: Load research_query_templates.md for per-type query templates.

Research Strategy

Based on the primary bottleneck type from the profiler:

Bottleneck TypeResearch Focus
ArchitectureBatching, pipelining, parallelism, DataLoader pattern
I/O-NetworkConnection pooling, HTTP/2, multiplexing, caching
I/O-DBQuery optimization, indexes, eager loading, bulk operations
I/O-FileStreaming, async I/O, memory-mapped files
CPUAlgorithm alternatives, vectorization, caching computation, OSS replacement
CacheEviction policies, cache key design, invalidation strategies, tiered caching, warm-up
ExternalCaching layer, circuit breaker, fallback strategies, provider alternatives

Research Protocol

FOR each top bottleneck (max 3):
  1. Select query templates from research_query_templates.md
  2. Execute research chain: Context7 → Ref → WebSearch (per research_tool_fallback.md)
  3. Collect solution approaches with expected impact
  4. Note technology prerequisites (libraries, infrastructure)

Solution Evaluation

FieldDescription
solutionName/description of the approach
sourceWhere found (URL, docs section)
expected_impactEstimated improvement (e.g., "9x reduction for N=9")
complexityLow / Medium / High
prerequisitesWhat's needed (library, infrastructure, API support)
feasibilityHIGH / MEDIUM / LOW — based on prerequisites availability

Phase 3: Local Codebase Check

Before recommending external solutions, check if the codebase already has the capability:

CheckHow
Batch/bulk methods on client classesGrep for batch, bulk, multi in client/service classes
Cache infrastructureGrep for redis, memcache, cache, @cached, lru_cache
Connection pool configurationGrep for pool_size, max_connections, pool in config
Async variantsGrep for async_, aio, Async prefix/suffix on methods
Unused configurationRead client/service config for batch_size, max_connections params

Impact on Feasibility

FindingEffect
Batch API exists, not usedFeasibility = HIGH, Complexity = LOW
Cache infra exists, not configured for this pathFeasibility = HIGH, Complexity = LOW-MEDIUM
No existing capability, requires new libraryFeasibility = MEDIUM, Complexity = MEDIUM-HIGH
Requires infrastructure changeFeasibility = LOW, Complexity = HIGH

Phase 4: Generate Hypotheses (3-7)

Hypothesis Sources (Priority Order)

PrioritySource
1Local codebase check (unused existing capabilities — lowest risk)
2Research findings (proven patterns from industry)
3Optimization hints from profiler

Hypothesis Format

FieldDescription
idH1, H2,... H7
descriptionWhat to change and how
bottleneck_addressedWhich bottleneck from time map (step reference)
expected_impactEstimated improvement % or multiplier
complexityLow / Medium / High
riskLow / Medium / High
files_to_modifyList of files that need changes
dependenciesOther hypotheses this depends on (e.g., "H2 requires H1")
conflicts_withHypotheses that become unnecessary if this one works

Anti-Bias Checks (mandatory before finalizing)

BiasCheckExample
Removal biasFor each "remove X" hypothesis: generate paired "optimize X" alternative"remove alignment" → also "optimize alignment config"
Industry bias"Industry doesn't use X" ≠ "X not needed for us". Check: does OUR product need it?"CAT tools skip alignment" but our users need it for quality
Premature conclusion"X is slow" ≠ "X is wrong". Slow may mean bad implementation, not wrong approach5.9s alignment → maybe wrong algorithm, not wrong feature

Rule: Every "remove feature" hypothesis MUST have a paired "optimize feature" hypothesis.

Fix Hierarchy (mandatory ordering)

Order hypotheses by fix level. Higher levels ALWAYS tried first:

LevelExamplePriority
1. Configurationmatching_methods="i", pool_size=10Highest — try first
2. InfrastructureAdd cache layer, scale service
3. FrameworkUse framework feature (batch API, built-in cache)
4. Application codeRefactor algorithm, add optimization
5. Feature removalRemove functionalityLowest — last resort only

Red flag: If highest-priority hypothesis is at level 4-5, re-examine: was a level 1-3 solution missed? Apply 5 Whys from root cause to verify.

Ordering Rules

Sort by: fix_level ASC, expected_impact DESC, complexity ASC, risk ASC.

Conflict detection: If H1 (batch API) solves the N+1 problem, H3 (parallel calls) becomes unnecessary. Mark H3.conflicts_with = ["H1"].

Dependency detection: If H2 (cache prefetch) builds on H1 (batch API), mark H2.dependencies = ["H1"].


Phase 5: Research Report

Report Structure

research_result:
  industry_benchmark:
    metric: "response_time"
    expected_range: "200-500ms"
    source: "..."
  recommended_target: 500          # ms — alias for target_metrics.wall_time_ms.value
  target_metrics:                  # per-metric quantitative targets
    wall_time_ms: { value: 500, source: "...", confidence: HIGH }
    http_round_trips: { value: 2, source: "...", confidence: HIGH }
    memory_peak_mb: { value: 128, source: "...", confidence: MEDIUM }
  competitor_analysis:
    - name, approach, metric, source
  solution_candidates:
    - solution, source, expected_impact, complexity, feasibility
  hypotheses:
    - id, description, bottleneck_addressed, expected_impact, complexity, risk,
      files_to_modify, dependencies, conflicts_with
  local_codebase_findings:
    - "Batch API exists: AlignmentClient.batch_align() — accepts up to 50 pairs"
    - "Redis configured but not used for alignment cache"
  research_sources:
    - url, date, relevance

Plan Mode

Read-only worker — all phases use MCP research tools (Ref, Context7, WebSearch) and code analysis only. Executes normally in Plan Mode via Skill().


Error Handling

ErrorRecovery
All research tools failUse built-in knowledge with disclaimer: "no external sources verified"
No competitive benchmarks foundSkip industry benchmark, note "no baseline found — using general guidelines"
Cannot generate hypothesesReturn empty list — coordinator decides next step
Local codebase check finds nothingProceed with external research results only

References

  • research_query_templates.md — query templates per bottleneck type
  • shared/references/research_tool_fallback.md — MCP research tool priority chain

Runtime Summary Artifact

MANDATORY READ: Load shared/references/coordinator_summary_contract.md

Emit an optimization-worker summary envelope.

Managed mode:

  • ln-810 passes deterministic runId and exact summaryArtifactPath
  • write the summary to the provided summaryArtifactPath

Standalone mode:

  • omit runId and summaryArtifactPath
  • write .hex-skills/runtime-artifacts/runs/{run_id}/optimization-worker/ln-812--{identifier}.json

Definition of Done

  • Competitive analysis completed (industry benchmarks, competitor approaches)
  • Target metrics researched per baseline metric (value, source, confidence)
  • Target metric defined (user-provided or derived from research)
  • Bottleneck-specific solutions researched via MCP chain
  • Local codebase checked for existing unused capabilities
  • 3-7 hypotheses generated, ordered by expected impact
  • Dependencies and conflicts between hypotheses identified
  • Research report prepared with sources
  • Optimization research artifact written to the shared location

Version: 2.0.0 Last Updated: 2026-03-14

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

39.29%
按下载量换算317

Claude

28.1%
按下载量换算227

Cursor

18.75%
按下载量换算151

Gemini CLI

10.21%
按下载量换算82

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

external-service

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

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