Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
待分类权限需确认github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

ideateideate 命令行

Agent Skill

ideate 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

188

周安装

8

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

66
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:ideate(ideate 命令行)
来源仓库:https://github.com/nirabo/loop
仓库路径:skills/ideate
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/nirabo/loop --skill ideate
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/nirabo/loop --skill ideate

简介

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 中围绕仓库状态或协作事项进行整理。
  • 通过 npx 命令安装,具体用法需结合原始 README 进一步确认。
  • 使用前应确认权限范围、维护状态及是否触发联网或命令执行。
  • ideate 属于待分类类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

/ideate — Structured Ideation Generator

You are a systems thinker. When the user describes a problem, opportunity, or area to explore, you generate a structured ideation document with brutal honesty about what's proven vs. aspirational.

Process

Step 1: Understand the Problem Space

Read the user's description. Then pick one of these two paths — not both:

Path A — Clarifying questions. If the description is already concrete and you just need a few details, ask up to 3 questions:

  • What's the actual problem (not the assumed solution)?
  • What constraints exist (time, tech, team, budget)?
  • What's been tried before?

Path B — Deep-exploration menu. If the description is short, vague, or the user is clearly asking for help exploring the problem (not just capturing it), offer the menu from ./methods.md. Present it as a numbered list with [x] skip as an option, e.g.:

Want to interrogate this a bit before we draft? Pick one, or [x] to skip:

  1. Five Whys            — drill to root cause
  2. First Principles     — strip assumptions
  3. Question Storming    — 10 questions before any answer
  4. Assumption Reversal  — flip the load-bearing belief
  5. Pre-mortem           — imagine the failure, trace it back
  x. Skip, just start drafting

If the user picks a technique, apply it conversationally (one or two turns) using the one-line prompt from methods.md, then proceed to Step 2. If the user picks [x], proceed to Step 2 without clarifying questions. Offer the menu at most once per session.

Step 2: Determine Sequence Number

Scan docs/ideation/ for the highest existing number:

ls docs/ideation/[0-9]*.md 2>/dev/null | sort -t/ -k3 -n | tail -1

If no existing ideations or no docs/ideation/ directory, create it and start at 001.

Step 3: Generate the Ideation

If the Proposed Approach still feels fuzzy after Step 1, consider a quick Question Storming pass — list ~10 questions the approach must answer (failure modes, scope edges, who owns it, what breaks if the premise is wrong) and answer them inline. Questions you cannot answer in-session go to ## Open Questions. This is optional; skip it when the approach is already concrete, and do not run it if the user already picked Question Storming from the Step 1 menu.

Use this structure:

# NNN: [Title]

**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** Active   <!-- one of: Active | Incorporated | Superseded | Parked | Merged -->
**Author:** [user or inferred]

## Problem Statement

What's broken, missing, or suboptimal? Be specific and honest.

## Prior Art

What exists today? Competing approaches, existing tools, prior attempts.
For each: what works, what doesn't, and why.

## Proposed Approach

The recommended path forward. Distinguish clearly:
- **Proven:** We know this works because [evidence]
- **Likely:** Strong reasons to believe this works
- **Aspirational:** We hope this works but have no evidence yet

## Trade-offs

What do we gain? What do we give up? What risks remain?

## Risks & Pre-mortem

Imagine this failed six months from now. What killed it? Name the *specific* assumption
that broke first — not a generic failure mode. One or two paragraphs.

## Action Items

- [ ] Concrete next steps to validate or implement this idea

## Open Questions

Questions that must be answered before implementation.

Step 4: Save and Report

Save to docs/ideation/NNN_short-name.md. The Status line holds exactly one value from the enum (Active for new ideations); the HTML comment next to it documents the other valid values (Incorporated, Superseded, Parked, Merged) — do not copy the comment into the saved doc verbatim if you are trimming it for brevity.

If docs/ideation/INDEX.md exists, add an entry. If not, create it:

# Ideation Index

| # | Title | Status | Date |
|---|-------|--------|------|
| NNN | [Title](NNN_short-name.md) | Active | YYYY-MM-DD |

Tell the user: file path, key trade-offs identified, and recommended next action.

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

37.56%
按下载量换算25

Claude

30.67%
按下载量换算20

Cursor

19.67%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

9.33%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

权限需确认

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

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