Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读clawhub未标认证来源可访问clear审计提醒

openclaw-skill-ideationOpenClaw 技能 ideation

Agent Skill

openclaw-skill-ideation 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 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

20,905

周安装

898

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

7,328
OpenClaw

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

MIT-0

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:openclaw-skill-ideation(OpenClaw 技能 ideation)
来源仓库:https://github.com/skidvis/openclaw-skill-ideation
安装命令:
openclaw skills install openclaw-skill-ideation
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install openclaw-skill-ideation

简介

将自由式口述转化为结构化实施方案。

  • 适用于整理凌乱的创意或流程想法时使用。
  • 输出格式清晰便于后续开发实现。openclaw-skill-ideation 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。
  • 建议配合模板使用以提高转化效率。适用宿主包括 OpenClaw,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。
  • 原始输入质量直接影响最终产出效果。

SKILL.md

name
ideation
description
Transform raw brain dumps (dictated freestyle) into structured implementation artifacts. Use when user has messy ideas, scattered thoughts, or dictated stream-of-consciousness, or when they want to plan a feature, spec something out, or turn rough ideas into actionable specs. Produces contracts and implementation specs written to ./docs/ideation/{project-name}/.

Ideation

Transform unstructured brain dumps into structured, actionable implementation artifacts through a confidence-gated workflow.

Workflow Pipeline

INTAKE → CODEBASE EXPLORATION → CONTRACT FORMATION → PHASING → SPEC GENERATION → HANDOFF
              ↓                        ↓                  ↓            ↓               ↓
         Understand              confidence < 95%?    PRDs or     Repeatable?    Analyze deps
         existing code                ↓               straight      ↓               ↓
                                 ASK QUESTIONS        to specs?   Template +    Sequential?
                                      ↓                           per-phase     Parallel?
                                 (loop until ≥95%)                deltas        

Phase 1: Intake

Accept whatever the user provides:

  • Scattered thoughts and half-formed ideas
  • Voice dictation transcripts (messy, stream-of-consciousness)
  • Bullet points mixed with rambling
  • Topic jumping and tangents
  • Contradictions and unclear statements
  • Technical jargon mixed with vague descriptions

Don't require organization. The mess is the input.

Acknowledge receipt and begin analysis. Do not ask for clarification yet.

Phase 2: Codebase Exploration

Before scoring confidence or generating any artifacts, understand the existing codebase. This is critical — specs written without understanding existing patterns, architecture, and conventions will be generic and wrong.

When to Explore

Exploration is needed when:

  • The brain dump references existing code, features, or systems
  • The project directory contains source code (not a greenfield project)
  • The user mentions extending, modifying, or integrating with existing functionality

Skip exploration for greenfield projects with no existing code.

What to Explore

Use file reading and search to understand:

  1. Project structure — What frameworks, languages, and patterns are in use?
  2. Relevant existing code — What modules/files relate to the brain dump's scope?
  3. Conventions and patterns — How are similar features implemented? What abstractions exist?
  4. Testing patterns — How is the codebase tested? What infrastructure exists?
  5. Configuration and build — What tools, package managers, and CI/CD are in use?

Do not write exploration findings to files. They're context for the ideation process, not an artifact.

Phase 3: Contract Formation

3.1 Analyze the Brain Dump

Extract from the raw input + codebase exploration:

  1. Problem signals: What pain point or need is being described?
  2. Goal signals: What does the user want to achieve?
  3. Success signals: How will they know it worked?
  4. Scope signals: What's included? What's explicitly excluded?
  5. Contradictions: Note any conflicting statements
  6. Codebase constraints: What does the existing architecture enable or limit?

3.2 Calculate Confidence Score

Score each dimension (0-20 points):

DimensionQuestion
Problem ClarityDo I understand what problem we're solving and why it matters?
Goal DefinitionAre the goals specific and measurable?
Success CriteriaCan I write tests or validation steps for "done"?
Scope BoundariesDo I know what's in and out of scope?
ConsistencyAre there contradictions I need resolved?

Total: /100 points

See references/confidence-rubric.md for detailed scoring criteria.

3.3 Confidence Thresholds

ScoreAction
< 70Major gaps. Ask 5+ questions targeting lowest dimensions.
70-84Moderate gaps. Ask 3-5 targeted questions.
85-94Minor gaps. Ask 1-2 specific questions.
≥ 95Ready to generate contract.

3.4 Ask Clarifying Questions

When confidence < 95%, ask clarifying questions:

Question strategy:

  • Target the lowest-scoring dimension first
  • Be specific, not open-ended
  • Offer options when possible ("Is it A, B, or C?")
  • Reference what was stated ("You mentioned X, did you mean...?")
  • Limit to 3-5 questions per round
  • After each round, recalculate confidence

3.5 Generate Contract

When confidence ≥ 95%:

  1. Confirm project name with user
  2. Convert to kebab-case for directory name
  3. Create output directory: ./docs/ideation/{project-name}/
  4. Write contract.md using references/contract-template.md
  5. Get explicit approval before proceeding

Do not proceed until contract is explicitly approved.

Phase 4: Phasing & Specification

4.1 Choose Workflow

Ask the user:

  • Straight to specs — Recommended for technical projects. Faster.
  • PRDs then specs — Recommended for large scope or cross-functional teams.

4.2 Determine Phases

Small-project shortcut: If the scope is small enough to implement in a single phase (1-3 components, touches fewer than ~10 files), skip phasing entirely. Generate a single spec.md.

Phasing criteria (for multi-phase projects):

  • Dependencies (what must be built first?)
  • Risk (tackle high-risk items early)
  • Value delivery (can users benefit after each phase?)
  • Complexity (balance phases for consistent effort)

4.3 Generate PRDs (if chosen)

For each phase, generate prd-phase-{n}.md using references/prd-template.md.

4.4 Generate Implementation Specs

Generate specs using references/spec-template.md:

  • Technical approach
  • File changes (new and modified)
  • Implementation details with code patterns
  • Testing requirements
  • Error handling
  • Validation commands
  • Per-component feedback loops

Reference existing code: Include "Pattern to follow: path/to/similar/file.ts" when relevant patterns exist.

4.5 Present for Review

Before presenting specs, evaluate feedback loop quality. Present all specs for user approval.

Phase 5: Execution Handoff

Present the execution strategy:

Ideation complete. Artifacts written to `./docs/ideation/{project-name}/`.

## To start implementation

Start a fresh session and work through the specs in order:
1. Read the contract for context
2. Read spec-phase-1.md  
3. Implement following the spec
4. Validate using the commands in the spec
5. Commit and move to next phase

Output Artifacts

All artifacts written to ./docs/ideation/{project-name}/:

contract.md                        # Problem, goals, success, scope
prd-phase-1.md                     # Phase 1 requirements (only if PRDs chosen)
spec-phase-1.md                    # Phase 1 implementation spec
spec-template-{pattern}.md         # Shared template for repeatable phases (if applicable)
spec-phase-{n}.md                  # Per-phase specs

Important Notes

  • Explore the codebase before scoring confidence (unless greenfield).
  • Score confidence conservatively. When uncertain, score lower.
  • Never skip the confidence check. Don't assume understanding.
  • Always write artifacts to files. Don't just display them.
  • Each phase should be independently valuable.
  • Specs should be detailed enough to implement without re-reading PRDs or the contract.
  • Keep contracts lean. Heavy docs slow iteration.
  • Reference existing code patterns in specs.
  • Small projects don't need phases. If scope is 1-3 components, generate a single spec.

适合场景

01

OpenClaw 用户查找和安装 Skill 时

02

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

03

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

04

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

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

OpenClaw

78.14%
按下载量换算5,726

安全审计

VirusTotal

可疑

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

未展示

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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