Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发操作浏览器github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

rnv病毒

Agent Skill

rnv 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

1,909

周安装

78

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

618
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:rnv(病毒)
来源仓库:https://github.com/aaarnv/claude-skills
仓库路径:skills/rnv
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/aaarnv/claude-skills --skill rnv
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/aaarnv/claude-skills --skill rnv

简介

用于处理 GitHub 仓库与协作信息,适合管理代码变更与团队事项。

  • 可获取 Issue、Pull Request 及仓库状态数据,辅助开发流程跟踪。
  • 通过 npx 命令从个人技能库安装,需检查仓库维护情况。
  • 涉及敏感操作时,应确认是否允许执行网络请求或 API 调用。
  • rnv 属于开发类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Chain-of-Verification (CoVe) System

You are operating in CoVe Mode - a rigorous verification framework that separates generation from verification to eliminate hallucinations and subtle errors.

Core Principle

"LLM-assisted code review, not LLM-generated code." Generation is cheap. Verification is where correctness lives.

THE 4-STAGE COVE PROTOCOL

When given ANY task, you MUST execute all 4 stages in order:

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

STAGE 1: INITIAL SOLUTION (Unverified Draft)

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Generate the best possible solution to: $ARGUMENTS

Rules for Stage 1:

  • Produce a complete, working implementation
  • This output is INTENTIONALLY UNTRUSTED
  • Do not self-censor or hedge - give your best attempt
  • Mark this clearly as [UNVERIFIED DRAFT]
## [UNVERIFIED DRAFT]

[Your initial implementation here]

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

STAGE 2: VERIFICATION PLANNING

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

WITHOUT re-solving the problem, enumerate everything that must be verified.

Create a checklist using this template:

## Verification Plan

### Critical Claims to Verify
- [ ] Claim 1: [specific assertion from Stage 1]
- [ ] Claim 2: [specific assertion from Stage 1]

### API/Library Correctness
- [ ] [API name]: [specific usage to verify]
- [ ] [Library]: [version compatibility, correct method signature]

### Edge Cases
- [ ] [Edge case 1]: [what could break]
- [ ] [Edge case 2]: [what could break]

### Concurrency & State
- [ ] [Race condition risk]: [where it could occur]
- [ ] [State mutation]: [potential issues]

### Type Safety
- [ ] [Type assertion 1]: [verify correctness]
- [ ] [Implicit any or unsafe cast]: [location]

### Environment Assumptions
- [ ] [Runtime]: [Node version, browser, etc.]
- [ ] [Database]: [engine, isolation level]
- [ ] [Dependencies]: [version requirements]

### Performance Claims
- [ ] [Complexity claim]: [O(n), O(n log n), etc.]
- [ ] [Memory usage]: [any concerns]

### Security Considerations
- [ ] [Input validation]: [where needed]
- [ ] [Injection risks]: [SQL, XSS, command]
- [ ] [Auth/authz]: [any assumptions]

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

STAGE 3: INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

CRITICAL: Do not rely on Stage 1 reasoning. Verify each item INDEPENDENTLY.

For each checklist item, provide:

## Independent Verification

### ✓ PASSED | ✗ FAILED | ⚠ WARNING

#### [Item Name]
- **Verdict**: ✓ PASSED / ✗ FAILED / ⚠ WARNING
- **Evidence**: [Concrete proof or counterexample]
- **If Failed**: [Specific fix required]

Verification Techniques to Use:

  1. Constraint-Driven Verification

- Verify against explicit environment constraints - Check version compatibility - Validate type correctness

  1. Adversarial Verification

- Attempt to construct inputs that break the code - Focus on: race conditions, off-by-one, null paths, stale closures

  1. Differential Reasoning

- Compare to naive/brute-force alternatives - Explain tradeoffs

  1. Line-by-Line Semantic Audit (for critical paths)

- Explain what each line does - Flag any line whose removal wouldn't change behavior

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

STAGE 4: FINAL VERIFIED SOLUTION

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Only after ALL verifications, produce the final result.

## [VERIFIED SOLUTION]

### Changes from Draft
- [Change 1]: [Why it was needed]
- [Change 2]: [Why it was needed]

### Verification Summary
- Total items checked: [N]
- Passed: [X]
- Failed & Fixed: [Y]
- Warnings acknowledged: [Z]

### Final Implementation

[Corrected code here]

### Remaining Caveats
- [Any known limitations]
- [Assumptions that couldn't be verified]

LAZY PROMPT CONVERSION

When the user provides a lazy/simple prompt, AUTOMATICALLY expand it using this template:

User says: "add a delete button"

CoVe converts to:

Task: Add a delete button to [inferred component/location]

Stage 1 - Initial Solution:
- Implement the delete button with proper UI
- Add click handler with confirmation
- Call appropriate API/mutation
- Handle loading/error states
- Update cache/state after deletion

Stage 2 - Verification Plan:
- [ ] Button placement follows design system
- [ ] Confirmation prevents accidental deletion
- [ ] API endpoint exists and is correct
- [ ] Optimistic update handles rollback on failure
- [ ] Cache invalidation is complete
- [ ] Loading state prevents double-clicks
- [ ] Error state is user-friendly
- [ ] Accessibility (aria-label, keyboard nav)

Stage 3 - Independent Verification:
[Verify each item]

Stage 4 - Final Verified Solution:
[Corrected implementation]

STACK-SPECIFIC VERIFICATION CHECKLISTS

React / Next.js

- [ ] useEffect dependency array is complete
- [ ] useMemo/useCallback dependencies are correct
- [ ] No stale closures in event handlers
- [ ] Keys are stable and unique
- [ ] Server/Client component boundary is correct
- [ ] Suspense boundaries handle loading
- [ ] Error boundaries catch failures

TanStack Query / React Query

- [ ] Query keys are consistent and follow pattern
- [ ] Mutations invalidate correct queries
- [ ] Optimistic updates have proper rollback
- [ ] Stale time / cache time are appropriate
- [ ] Infinite queries handle page boundaries
- [ ] Prefetching doesn't cause waterfalls

tRPC

- [ ] Procedure types match (query vs mutation)
- [ ] Input validation is complete (Zod schema)
- [ ] Error handling uses TRPCError
- [ ] Context has required auth/session
- [ ] Batching is considered for multiple calls

Prisma / Database

- [ ] Transactions wrap related operations
- [ ] Isolation level is appropriate
- [ ] N+1 queries are avoided (include/select)
- [ ] Unique constraints are enforced
- [ ] Cascade deletes are intentional
- [ ] Indexes exist for query patterns

TypeScript

- [ ] No `any` types (explicit or implicit)
- [ ] Null/undefined handled properly
- [ ] Type narrowing is sound
- [ ] Generics are constrained appropriately
- [ ] Return types are explicit for public APIs

Async / Concurrency

- [ ] Promise.all used for independent operations
- [ ] Race conditions are prevented
- [ ] Cleanup functions in useEffect
- [ ] AbortController for cancellable requests
- [ ] Debounce/throttle where appropriate

ADVERSARIAL PROMPTS FOR STAGE 3

Use these to stress-test your Stage 1 solution:

For Async Code

Attempt to construct a sequence of events that would cause:
1. Race condition between two concurrent calls
2. Stale data displayed after mutation
3. Memory leak from uncancelled subscription
4. Deadlock or infinite loop

For State Management

Attempt to reach an invalid state by:
1. Rapid successive user actions
2. Network failure mid-operation
3. Component unmount during async operation
4. Browser back/forward navigation

For API Endpoints

Attempt to break this endpoint with:
1. Missing or malformed input
2. Unauthorized access
3. SQL/NoSQL injection
4. Excessive payload size
5. Concurrent conflicting requests

For React Components

Attempt to cause incorrect rendering by:
1. Props changing faster than render cycle
2. Parent re-rendering with same props
3. Context value changing mid-render
4. Suspense boundary resolution order

WHEN TO USE COVE

Always use for:

  • Any stateful code
  • Concurrency/async logic
  • Database operations
  • Authentication/authorization
  • Financial calculations
  • Data transformations with edge cases

Skip only for:

  • Trivial one-liners
  • Pure stylistic changes
  • Throwaway prototypes
  • README/docs updates

EXAMPLE: Full CoVe Flow

User prompt: "add pagination to the users table"

Stage 1: [UNVERIFIED DRAFT]

// Initial implementation
const { data, fetchNextPage, hasNextPage } = useInfiniteQuery({
  queryKey: ['users'],
  queryFn: ({ pageParam = 0 }) => fetchUsers({ offset: pageParam, limit: 20 }),
  getNextPageParam: (lastPage) => lastPage.nextOffset,
})

Stage 2: Verification Plan

- [ ] Query key includes filter/sort params
- [ ] Offset calculation is correct at boundaries
- [ ] Loading state shown during fetch
- [ ] Empty state handled
- [ ] Error state handled
- [ ] Total count displayed correctly
- [ ] Page size is configurable
- [ ] URL state synced with pagination
- [ ] Keyboard navigation works
- [ ] Screen reader announces page changes

Stage 3: Independent Verification

✗ FAILED: Query key includes filter/sort params
  - Evidence: queryKey is just ['users'], doesn't include filters
  - Fix: queryKey: ['users', { filters, sort }]

✗ FAILED: URL state synced with pagination
  - Evidence: Page state is local, lost on refresh
  - Fix: Use URL search params or router state

✓ PASSED: Offset calculation
  - Evidence: getNextPageParam correctly returns nextOffset from API

⚠ WARNING: Total count displayed
  - Evidence: API returns total but we don't display it
  - Recommendation: Show "Page X of Y" or "Showing 1-20 of 156"

Stage 4: [VERIFIED SOLUTION]

// Corrected implementation with all fixes applied
const [searchParams, setSearchParams] = useSearchParams()
const page = Number(searchParams.get('page')) || 0

const { data, fetchNextPage, hasNextPage, isLoading, error } = useInfiniteQuery({
  queryKey: ['users', { filters, sort, page }],
  queryFn: ({ pageParam = page }) => fetchUsers({
    offset: pageParam * PAGE_SIZE,
    limit: PAGE_SIZE
  }),
  getNextPageParam: (lastPage, allPages) =>
    lastPage.hasMore ? allPages.length : undefined,
})

// Sync to URL
const goToPage = (newPage: number) => {
  setSearchParams({ page: String(newPage) })
}

Integration with /wavybaby

/wavybaby automatically invokes CoVe for non-trivial tasks. You can also invoke /cove directly when you want verification without the full wavybaby toolkit analysis.

/wavybaby [task] → native dispatch + skill discovery + CoVe
/cove [task]     → just the 4-stage verification protocol

Now executing CoVe protocol for: $ARGUMENTS

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

39.6%
按下载量换算245

Claude

28.79%
按下载量换算178

Cursor

17.27%
按下载量换算107

Gemini CLI

10.3%
按下载量换算64

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。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