Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索执行命令github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

thinking-systems思维系统

Agent Skill

thinking-systems 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

517

周安装

22

GitHub Stars

46

下载量

181
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:thinking-systems(思维系统)
来源仓库:https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills
仓库路径:skills/thinking-systems
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems
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/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems

简介

思维系统用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。

  • 适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor 等宿主中基于关键词或场景定位结果。
  • 通过 npx 安装并指定技能名称,可结合仓库路径继续核验用法。
  • 使用前需确认权限范围、维护状态及是否触发联网或文件操作。
  • thinking-systems 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Systems Thinking

Overview

Systems thinking views problems as part of interconnected wholes rather than isolated components. It focuses on relationships, feedback loops, and emergent properties—behaviors that arise from interactions and can't be predicted from parts alone. Essential for debugging complex distributed systems and understanding why "obvious" fixes often fail.

Core Principle: The behavior of a system cannot be understood by analyzing components in isolation. Look at connections, feedback, and emergence.

When to Use

  • Debugging issues that span multiple services/components
  • Understanding unexpected emergent behavior
  • Designing resilient architectures
  • Analyzing incidents and outages
  • When fixing one thing breaks another
  • Performance issues with non-obvious causes
  • Organizational/process problems

Decision flow:

Problem spans multiple components?     → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING
Fix in one place caused issue in another? → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING
Behavior seems "emergent" or unexpected?  → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING

Key Concepts

1. Feedback Loops

Reinforcing (Positive) Loops: Amplify change

Technical Debt Loop:
Deadline pressure → Shortcuts → More bugs → More firefighting
                                           ↓
                            ← Less time for quality ←

Balancing (Negative) Loops: Counteract change

Auto-scaling Loop:
Load increases → More instances spawn → Load per instance decreases
                                       ↓
                    ← Fewer instances needed ←

Questions to identify loops:

  • Does this effect feed back into its cause?
  • Is this self-reinforcing or self-correcting?
  • What keeps this system in equilibrium?

2. Stocks and Flows

Stocks: Accumulated quantities (users, technical debt, cache size) Flows: Rates of change (registrations/day, bugs fixed/sprint)

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Inflow → [Stock] → Outflow         │
│                                     │
│  New bugs → [Bug Backlog] → Fixes   │
│  Requests → [Queue Depth] → Processed│
│  Hires → [Team Size] → Attrition    │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Key insight: Stocks change slowly even when flows change quickly. Queue depth doesn't drop instantly when you add capacity.

3. Delays

Time lags between cause and effect obscure relationships:

Code deployed → [Delay: Cache TTL] → Users see change
Feature shipped → [Delay: Adoption curve] → Metrics change
New hire starts → [Delay: Ramp-up] → Productivity impact

Danger: Acting before feedback arrives leads to overcorrection.

4. Non-Linear Relationships

Small changes can have large effects (and vice versa):

Linear assumption: 2x traffic = 2x latency
Reality: Traffic crosses threshold → 10x latency (queue buildup)

Linear assumption: Adding engineer adds capacity
Reality: Communication overhead grows O(n²)

5. Emergent Properties

Behaviors that arise from interactions, not individual components:

  • Distributed system: No single service is slow, but the system is slow (cascading delays)
  • Team dynamics: No individual is toxic, but collaboration is toxic (incentive interactions)
  • Market behavior: No actor intends a bubble, but bubble emerges

Systems Debugging Process

Step 1: Map the System

Draw components, connections, and data/control flows:

┌─────────┐     ┌─────────┐     ┌─────────┐
│ Client  │────▶│   API   │────▶│   DB    │
└─────────┘     └────┬────┘     └─────────┘
                     │
                     ▼
               ┌─────────┐
               │  Cache  │
               └─────────┘

Step 2: Identify Feedback Loops

For each loop, determine:

  • Is it reinforcing or balancing?
  • What's the delay in the loop?
  • What could make it unstable?
Retry Storm Loop (Reinforcing - Dangerous):
Service slow → Clients retry → More load → Service slower → More retries

Step 3: Trace Upstream

Follow the symptom backward to find originating cause:

Symptom: High latency in Service C
→ Service C waiting on Service B
  → Service B waiting on Service A
    → Service A doing full table scan (ROOT CAUSE)

Step 4: Look for Interactions

What happens when components interact under stress?

  • Circuit breakers tripping
  • Cascading timeouts
  • Resource contention
  • Thundering herd

Step 5: Consider Time Dynamics

  • When did this start?
  • What changed recently (deploys, config, traffic)?
  • Is it periodic? (Cron jobs, cache expiration, batch processes)
  • Is it growing or stabilizing?

Common System Patterns

Cascading Failure

One component fails → Dependent components overload → They fail
                                                    ↓
                              ← More traffic to remaining ←

Mitigation: Circuit breakers, bulkheads, graceful degradation

Thundering Herd

Cache expires → All requests hit backend simultaneously → Overload

Mitigation: Jittered expiration, cache warming, request coalescing

Queue Backup

Processing rate < Arrival rate → Queue grows → Memory pressure → OOM

Mitigation: Backpressure, rate limiting, queue bounds

Resource Contention

Multiple processes → Same resource → Lock contention → Serialization
                                                     ↓
                    Throughput collapses despite available CPU

Mitigation: Sharding, optimistic locking, resource isolation

Causal Loop Diagram Template

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    System: [Name]                            │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                              │
│    ┌─────────┐                        ┌─────────┐           │
│    │ Factor  │──────(+)──────────────▶│ Factor  │           │
│    │    A    │                        │    B    │           │
│    └─────────┘                        └────┬────┘           │
│         ▲                                  │                │
│         │                                  │                │
│        (-)                                (+)               │
│         │                                  │                │
│         │         ┌─────────┐              │                │
│         └─────────│ Factor  │◀─────────────┘                │
│                   │    C    │                               │
│                   └─────────┘                               │
│                                                              │
│   Legend: (+) = same direction, (-) = opposite direction    │
│   Loop type: Reinforcing / Balancing                        │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Leverage Points

Where small changes have large effects (Donella Meadows):

LeverageExampleImpact
ParametersTimeout valuesLow
Buffer sizesQueue limitsLow-Medium
Feedback loopsAdd monitoringMedium
Information flowsMake metrics visibleMedium-High
RulesChange retry policyHigh
GoalsRedefine SLOsVery High
ParadigmRethink architectureTransformational

Verification Checklist

  • Mapped system components and connections
  • Identified at least one feedback loop
  • Traced symptom upstream to potential root causes
  • Considered time delays in the system
  • Looked for emergent/interaction effects
  • Identified leverage points for intervention
  • Considered unintended consequences of fix

Key Questions

  • "What feeds back into what?"
  • "Where are the delays in this system?"
  • "What happens when this scales 10x?"
  • "What would an observer see vs. what's actually happening?"
  • "If I fix this here, what breaks over there?"
  • "What behavior emerges that no single component intends?"
  • "Where is the smallest change with the largest effect?"

Meadows' Reminder

"We can't control systems or figure them out. But we can dance with them."

Systems resist simple fixes. Effective intervention requires understanding the whole, finding leverage points, and accepting that you're influencing, not controlling.

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

36.29%
按下载量换算66

Claude

28.36%
按下载量换算51

Cursor

19.4%
按下载量换算35

Gemini CLI

10.88%
按下载量换算20

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

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