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

syncing-submodules同步子模块

Agent Skill

syncing-submodules 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

873

周安装

36

GitHub Stars

4

下载量

285
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:syncing-submodules(同步子模块)
来源仓库:https://github.com/eyadsibai/ltk
仓库路径:skills/syncing-submodules
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/eyadsibai/ltk --skill syncing-submodules
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/eyadsibai/ltk --skill syncing-submodules

简介

同步子模块用于查找、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。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装并使用该技能。
  • 安装前需确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。
  • syncing-submodules 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Intelligent Submodule Sync System

This skill provides a sophisticated framework for syncing components from git submodules while ensuring consistency, avoiding duplicates, and maintaining quality.

Core Principles

  1. No Duplicates - Same concept should exist only once
  2. No Near-Duplicates - Similar concepts should be merged
  3. Quality Over Quantity - Better to have fewer excellent components than many mediocre ones
  4. Semantic Analysis - Compare meaning, not just names
  5. Synthesis Over Copying - Create superior merged versions

Phase 1: Deep Discovery

1.1 Scan All Submodules

# Update submodules
git submodule update --remote --merge

# Create inventory
for submodule in submodules/*/; do
  echo "=== $submodule ==="
  find "$submodule" -name "SKILL.md" -o -name "*.md" -path "*/commands/*" -o -name "*.md" -path "*/agents/*"
done

1.2 Extract Component Metadata

For EACH discovered component, extract:

component:
  name: "component-name"
  type: "skill|agent|command|hook"
  source: "submodule-name"
  path: "full/path/to/file"

  # Deep analysis fields
  primary_purpose: "One sentence describing main function"
  keywords: ["keyword1", "keyword2", "keyword3"]
  capabilities: ["capability1", "capability2"]
  target_audience: "who uses this"
  domain: "core|engineering|data|devops|design|product|github"

Phase 2: Semantic Similarity Analysis

2.1 Similarity Detection Matrix

For each pair of components (existing + new), calculate similarity:

Similarity TypeWeightDetection Method
Name Similarity15%Levenshtein distance, common prefixes
Keyword Overlap25%Jaccard similarity of extracted keywords
Purpose Overlap30%Semantic comparison of descriptions
Capability Overlap30%Function/feature comparison

2.2 Similarity Thresholds

ScoreClassificationAction
90-100%DuplicateKeep best, discard other
70-89%Near-DuplicateMerge into single component
50-69%RelatedConsider consolidation
30-49%Tangentially RelatedKeep separate, cross-reference
0-29%DistinctAdd if quality threshold met

2.3 Semantic Comparison Checklist

When comparing two similar components:

## Comparison: [Component A] vs [Component B]

### Purpose Analysis
- A's purpose: ___
- B's purpose: ___
- Overlap: ___% | Distinct: ___%

### Content Comparison
| Aspect | Component A | Component B | Better |
|--------|-------------|-------------|--------|
| Completeness | 1-10 | 1-10 | A/B |
| Clarity | 1-10 | 1-10 | A/B |
| Examples | count | count | A/B |
| Edge cases | count | count | A/B |
| Actionability | 1-10 | 1-10 | A/B |

### Unique Features
- Only in A: ___
- Only in B: ___

### Decision: [KEEP_A | KEEP_B | MERGE | KEEP_BOTH]
### Rationale: ___

Phase 3: Quality Scoring

3.1 Component Quality Rubric

Score each component 0-100:

CriterionWeightScoring
Completeness20%Covers topic thoroughly
Clarity20%Easy to understand and follow
Actionability15%Provides concrete steps
Examples15%Has good, relevant examples
Edge Cases10%Handles exceptions
Formatting10%Proper markdown, structure
CSO Optimization10%Good trigger phrases in description

3.2 Quality Thresholds

ScoreQuality LevelAction
80-100ExcellentAdd/keep as-is
60-79GoodAdd with minor improvements
40-59MediocreOnly add if fills gap, improve first
0-39PoorDo not add

Phase 4: Conflict Resolution

4.1 Same Concept, Different Names

Example: "verification" vs "validation" vs "checking-work"

Resolution Process:

  1. Identify all variants
  2. Analyze each for unique value
  3. Choose canonical name (most intuitive)
  4. Merge all content into canonical
  5. Ensure description covers ALL trigger phrases

4.2 Same Name, Different Purposes

Example: Two "debug" commands doing different things

Resolution Process:

  1. Determine which aligns with ltk's existing conventions
  2. Rename the other to be more specific
  3. Or merge if they're complementary

4.3 Conflicting Advice

Example: One says "always use X", another says "never use X"

Resolution Process:

  1. Identify the CONTEXT for each piece of advice
  2. Create nuanced guidance with conditions
  3. Add examples for each scenario
  4. Document when each applies

4.4 Decision Tree

Is this component new to ltk?
├── YES → Quality score >= 60?
│   ├── YES → Add with ltk conventions
│   └── NO → Skip or improve first
│
└── NO → Similar exists in ltk
    ├── Similarity >= 90% (Duplicate)
    │   └── Compare quality scores → Keep better one
    │
    ├── Similarity 70-89% (Near-Duplicate)
    │   └── Merge: combine best of both
    │
    ├── Similarity 50-69% (Related)
    │   └── Evaluate: consolidate or keep separate?
    │
    └── Similarity < 50% (Distinct enough)
        └── Quality score >= 60? → Add

Phase 5: Domain-Specific Placement

5.1 Domain Classification

DomainPluginIndicators
Context/Memory/Agentsltk-core"context", "memory", "agent", "prompt", "LLM"
Code/Testing/Architectureltk-engineering"code", "test", "refactor", "architecture"
Data/ML/Analyticsltk-data"data", "SQL", "ML", "analytics", "database"
Infrastructure/Securityltk-devops"deploy", "k8s", "docker", "security", "CI/CD"
UI/UX/Accessibilityltk-design"design", "UI", "UX", "accessibility", "CSS"
Marketing/Sales/Businessltk-product"marketing", "sales", "SEO", "content", "business"
Git/GitHub/PRsltk-github"git", "PR", "commit", "GitHub", "branch"

5.2 Cross-Domain Components

Some components span domains. Place in PRIMARY domain, cross-reference in others:

# In primary location
---
name: component-name
related:
  - ltk-engineering/skills/related-skill
  - ltk-devops/agents/related-agent
---

Phase 6: Merge Strategies

6.1 Skill Merge Template

---
name: merged-skill-name
description: [Combined CSO-optimized description covering ALL trigger phrases]
version: 1.0.0
sources: [source1, source2]  # Attribution
---

# [Skill Title]

[Best introduction from all sources]

## [Section from Source A - if superior]

[Content]

## [Section from Source B - if unique]

[Content]

## [Merged section - combining both]

[Synthesized content taking best from each]

<!--
Merge Notes:
- Took X from source1 because: reason
- Took Y from source2 because: reason
- Combined Z because: reason
-->

6.2 Agent Merge Strategy

---
agent: merged-agent-name
description: |
  [Combined description with all use cases]
  <example>...</example>
  <example>...</example>  # Include examples from ALL sources
model: [keep more capable model]
tools: [union of all tools needed]
color: [consistent with ltk conventions]
sources: [source1, source2]
---

# [Agent Title]

[Synthesized capabilities from all sources]

## Workflow
[Best workflow, enhanced with steps from other sources]

6.3 Command Merge Strategy

Commands should generally NOT be merged - they're distinct actions. Instead:

  • Keep the more complete version
  • Add unique features from other version
  • Ensure no naming conflicts

Phase 7: Deduplication Audit

7.1 Pre-Sync Audit

Before syncing, audit EXISTING ltk components:

# Find potential duplicates by keyword analysis
for skill in plugins/*/skills/*/SKILL.md; do
  echo "=== $skill ==="
  grep -i "description:" "$skill"
done | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn

7.2 Duplicate Detection Patterns

PatternLikely Duplicate
Same verb + noun"code review" / "reviewing code"
Synonym usage"validate" / "verify" / "check"
Same domain + action"git commit" / "committing changes"
Acronym vs full"TDD" / "test driven development"

7.3 Post-Sync Verification

After sync, verify no duplicates introduced:

# Check for duplicate skill names
find plugins -name "SKILL.md" -exec basename {} \; | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -20

# Check for duplicate agent names
find plugins/*/agents -name "*.md" -exec basename {} .md \; | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -20

# Check for duplicate command names
find plugins/*/commands -name "*.md" -exec basename {} .md \; | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -20

Phase 8: Output Report Format

# Submodule Sync Report

**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Submodules Analyzed:** N
**Components Discovered:** N
**Components Added:** N
**Components Merged:** N
**Duplicates Removed:** N

## Similarity Analysis Summary

| Comparison | Similarity | Decision |
|------------|------------|----------|
| A vs B | 85% | Merged → A |
| C vs D | 95% | Duplicate, kept C |
| E vs F | 45% | Kept both |

## Quality Scores

| Component | Source | Score | Decision |
|-----------|--------|-------|----------|
| skill-x | submodule-1 | 82 | Added |
| agent-y | submodule-2 | 55 | Improved, then added |
| command-z | submodule-3 | 35 | Rejected (low quality) |

## Components Added

| Type | Name | Domain | Source | Notes |
|------|------|--------|--------|-------|
| skill | name | ltk-core | sub1 | New capability |

## Components Merged

| Result | Sources | Merge Strategy |
|--------|---------|----------------|
| skill-a | skill-a1 + skill-a2 | Combined best sections |

## Duplicates Resolved

| Kept | Removed | Reason |
|------|---------|--------|
| A (ltk) | A' (submodule) | ltk version more complete |

## Rejected (Quality)

| Component | Source | Score | Reason |
|-----------|--------|-------|--------|
| skill-x | sub3 | 35 | Poor formatting, incomplete |

## Action Items

- [ ] Review merged component: X
- [ ] Test new command: Y
- [ ] Consider consolidating: Z1 + Z2

Remember

  1. Always do semantic analysis - Names can be deceiving
  2. Quality gates are mandatory - Don't add mediocre content
  3. Merge > Add - Prefer enhancing existing over adding similar
  4. Attribution matters - Credit sources
  5. Test after sync - Verify nothing broke
  6. Document decisions - Future you will thank present you

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

35.34%
按下载量换算101

Claude

31.79%
按下载量换算91

Cursor

18.35%
按下载量换算52

Gemini CLI

9.29%
按下载量换算26

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

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