Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
前端设计需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

unify-types统一类型

Agent Skill

unify-types 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

220

周安装

9

GitHub Stars

2

下载量

71
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:unify-types(统一类型)
来源仓库:https://github.com/marius-townhouse/effective-typescript-skills
仓库路径:skills/unify-types
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/marius-townhouse/effective-typescript-skills --skill unify-types
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/marius-townhouse/effective-typescript-skills --skill unify-types

简介

unify-types 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、代码变更或协作事项进行整理。
  • 可通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装使用。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网或文件读写操作。
  • 具体用法需结合原始 README 和项目实际情况进一步核验。

SKILL.md

Prefer Unifying Types to Modeling Differences

Overview

Minor differences often don't warrant separate types.

When types are almost identical, unifying them simplifies your code. The cost of handling small differences is usually less than maintaining parallel type hierarchies.

When to Use This Skill

  • Types that differ by one or two properties
  • Union types that are mostly the same
  • Considering separate types for variants
  • Simplifying complex type relationships

The Iron Rule

Unify types unless differences are fundamental.
Small variations can be handled at runtime.

Remember:

  • Duplicate types = duplicate handling code
  • Union of similar types = repeated narrowing
  • One flexible type is often simpler than many specific ones
  • Question: do the differences REALLY matter to the type system?

Detection: Parallel Types

// Two types that are almost identical
interface Dog {
  name: string;
  breed: string;
  barkVolume: number;
}

interface Cat {
  name: string;
  breed: string;
  meowVolume: number;
}

type Pet = Dog | Cat;

// Every function needs to narrow:
function getPetInfo(pet: Pet): string {
  if ('barkVolume' in pet) {
    return `${pet.name} barks at ${pet.barkVolume}`;
  } else {
    return `${pet.name} meows at ${pet.meowVolume}`;
  }
}

Unified Approach

interface Pet {
  name: string;
  breed: string;
  vocalizationType: 'bark' | 'meow';
  vocalizationVolume: number;
}

function getPetInfo(pet: Pet): string {
  return `${pet.name} ${pet.vocalizationType}s at ${pet.vocalizationVolume}`;
}

No narrowing needed. One type handles both cases.

When to Keep Types Separate

Fundamentally Different Behaviors

// These really are different
interface File {
  path: string;
  read(): Buffer;
  write(data: Buffer): void;
}

interface Directory {
  path: string;
  list(): string[];
  create(name: string): void;
}

Files and directories have different operations. Unifying would lose type safety.

Different Cardinalities

// Different structures
interface SingleResult {
  value: number;
}

interface MultipleResults {
  values: number[];
  average: number;
}

These have genuinely different shapes.

Practical Example: API Responses

// Separate types
interface SuccessResponse {
  status: 'success';
  data: Data;
  timestamp: Date;
}

interface ErrorResponse {
  status: 'error';
  error: string;
  timestamp: Date;
}

type Response = SuccessResponse | ErrorResponse;

// Handling requires narrowing everywhere
function logResponse(res: Response) {
  console.log(`${res.timestamp}: ${res.status}`);
  if (res.status === 'success') {
    console.log(res.data);  // Need to narrow
  }
}

Consider if unified is simpler:

// Unified type
interface Response {
  status: 'success' | 'error';
  data?: Data;      // Present on success
  error?: string;   // Present on error
  timestamp: Date;
}

// Can access common fields without narrowing
function logResponse(res: Response) {
  console.log(`${res.timestamp}: ${res.status}`);
  if (res.data) {
    console.log(res.data);
  }
}

The Tagged Union Middle Ground

Sometimes a tagged union is the right balance:

// Tagged union: explicit about differences, unified handling
interface Animal {
  name: string;
  breed: string;
}

interface Dog extends Animal {
  type: 'dog';
  barkVolume: number;
}

interface Cat extends Animal {
  type: 'cat';
  meowVolume: number;
}

type Pet = Dog | Cat;

// Common operations don't need narrowing
function getName(pet: Pet): string {
  return pet.name;  // Works for both
}

// Type-specific operations are explicit
function getVolume(pet: Pet): number {
  return pet.type === 'dog' ? pet.barkVolume : pet.meowVolume;
}

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Before creating separate types, ask:

  1. How often do I need type-specific behavior?

- Rarely → Unify - Frequently → Separate

  1. Are the differences structural or semantic?

- Same structure, different meaning → Maybe unify - Different structure → Keep separate

  1. Will unifying lose important type safety?

- Yes → Keep separate - No → Unify

Real Example: Events

// Over-differentiated
interface ClickEvent {
  type: 'click';
  x: number;
  y: number;
  target: Element;
}

interface KeyEvent {
  type: 'key';
  key: string;
  target: Element;
}

interface ScrollEvent {
  type: 'scroll';
  scrollTop: number;
  target: Element;
}

Could unify common parts:

interface BaseEvent {
  type: string;
  target: Element;
}

interface ClickEvent extends BaseEvent {
  type: 'click';
  x: number;
  y: number;
}

// etc.

Or fully unify if differences rarely matter:

interface UIEvent {
  type: 'click' | 'key' | 'scroll';
  target: Element;
  details: ClickDetails | KeyDetails | ScrollDetails;
}

Pressure Resistance Protocol

1. "Types Should Be Precise"

Pressure: "Separate types are more accurate"

Response: Precision has a cost in code complexity.

Action: Weigh precision benefits against handling complexity.

2. "They Might Diverge Later"

Pressure: "Keep them separate for future flexibility"

Response: That's YAGNI. Refactor if they actually diverge.

Action: Unify now; separate later if needed.

Red Flags - STOP and Reconsider

  • Union types where most properties are shared
  • Repeated narrowing code for similar types
  • Types that differ by one property name
  • Parallel implementations for "different" types

Common Rationalizations (All Invalid)

ExcuseReality
"They're conceptually different"Code doesn't care about concepts
"Separate types are cleaner"More types = more handling code
"We might need the distinction"Cross that bridge when you come to it

Quick Reference

// DON'T: Separate types for minor differences
interface Dog { name: string; bark: () => void; }
interface Cat { name: string; meow: () => void; }
type Pet = Dog | Cat;

// DO: Unified type
interface Pet {
  name: string;
  sound: 'bark' | 'meow';
  makeSound: () => void;
}

// DO: Keep separate when genuinely different
interface File { read(): Buffer; write(b: Buffer): void; }
interface Directory { list(): string[]; }

The Bottom Line

Unify types unless differences are fundamental.

Separate types mean separate handling code everywhere. When types share most properties and differ only in details, a unified type with optional or variant fields is often simpler.

Reference

Based on "Effective TypeScript" by Dan Vanderkam, Item 39: Prefer Unifying Types to Modeling Differences.

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

35.31%
按下载量换算25

Claude

29.39%
按下载量换算21

Cursor

21.78%
按下载量换算15

Gemini CLI

10.31%
按下载量换算7

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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