Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

advisor-triggers(顾问触发)

advisor-triggers 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。

advisor-triggers 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为权限未标注;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 56,981。

总安装 442周安装 19GitHub Stars 23下载 155核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

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:advisor-triggers(顾问触发)
来源仓库:https://github.com/akaszubski/autonomous-dev
仓库路径:skills/advisor-triggers
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/akaszubski/autonomous-dev --skill advisor-triggers
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/akaszubski/autonomous-dev --skill advisor-triggers

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

advisor-triggers 用于识别用户请求中的关键模式,自动建议启动深度分析流程以提升决策质量。适合在引入新技术、架构变更或依赖扩展时,提前评估复杂度与维护风险。可检测新增依赖、架构重构或系统迁移等场景,并提示权衡利弊与潜在影响。通过关键词匹配与上下文分析触发建议,无需手动配置规则,提升响应效率。

安装前请确认是否具备读取用户输入权限,避免误判或过度干预常规对话流程。

来源仓库内路径:skills/advisor-triggers

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/akaszubski/autonomous-dev --skill advisor-trig…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    权限没有明确标注,第一次使用时只给一个无关紧要的任务,观察它到底读了哪些文件和网络。

常见问题

6 条

advisor-triggers 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/akaszubski/autonomous-dev --skill advisor-triggers。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

advisor-triggers 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

advisor-triggers 需要什么权限?

权限级别没有明确标注。第一次使用时建议只给无关紧要的任务,观察它实际读写了哪些内容。

advisor-triggers 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

advisor-triggers 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 442 次,近一周安装 19 次,下载 155 次,GitHub 23 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

advisor-triggers 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
advisor-triggers

顾问触发 · 本页

44223权限未标注未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Advisor Auto-Invoke Triggers

Purpose

Detect patterns in user requests that indicate a need for critical thinking analysis. Suggests running /advise when users propose significant changes without first considering trade-offs.

Detection Patterns

Pattern 1: New Dependencies

Triggers:

  • "add [package/library/service]"
  • "use [technology]"
  • "integrate [external service]"
  • "switch to [different tool]"

Examples:

  • "Let's add Redis for caching"
  • "Use TensorFlow for ML"
  • "Integrate Stripe for payments"
  • "Switch to PostgreSQL"

Why advise? New dependencies increase complexity and maintenance burden.

Pattern 2: Architecture Changes

Triggers:

  • "refactor to [pattern]"
  • "restructure as [architecture]"
  • "migrate to [architecture]"
  • "convert to [pattern]"

Examples:

  • "Refactor to microservices"
  • "Restructure as event-driven"
  • "Migrate to serverless"
  • "Convert to monorepo"

Why advise? Architectural changes have far-reaching implications.

Pattern 3: Scope Expansions

Triggers:

  • "also add [feature]"
  • "extend to [capability]"
  • "support [new use case]"
  • "make it [do more]"

Examples:

  • "Also add real-time collaboration"
  • "Extend to mobile platforms"
  • "Support multi-tenancy"
  • "Make it work offline"

Why advise? Scope creep can derail projects.

Pattern 4: Technology Replacements

Triggers:

  • "[X] instead of [Y]"
  • "replace [X] with [Y]"
  • "swap [X] for [Y]"

Examples:

  • "GraphQL instead of REST"
  • "Replace Express with Fastify"
  • "Swap MySQL for MongoDB"

Why advise? Tech replacements have migration costs.

Pattern 5: Scale Changes

Triggers:

  • "handle [large number]"
  • "scale to [big metric]"
  • "support [many users]"

Examples:

  • "Handle 1M requests/day"
  • "Scale to 100K users"
  • "Support 10K concurrent"

Why advise? Premature optimization is common.

Detection Logic

function shouldInvokeAdvisor(userRequest: string): boolean {
  const triggers = [
    // Dependencies
    /add (redis|mongodb|postgres|graphql|webpack|docker)/i,
    /use (tensorflow|pytorch|react|vue|angular)/i,
    /integrate (stripe|auth0|sendgrid|aws)/i,
    /switch to (typescript|rust|go|kubernetes)/i,

    // Architecture
    /refactor to (microservices|serverless|event-driven)/i,
    /restructure as/i,
    /migrate to/i,
    /convert to/i,

    // Scope
    /also add/i,
    /extend to/i,
    /support (mobile|multi-tenant|real-time|offline)/i,

    // Technology replacement
    /instead of/i,
    /replace \w+ with/i,
    /swap \w+ for/i,

    // Scale
    /scale to/i,
    /handle \d+[kmb]/i, // 1k, 1m, 1b
    /support \d+k/i
  ];

  return triggers.some(pattern => pattern.test(userRequest));
}

Response Format

When trigger detected:

⚠️ **Significant decision detected**

Your request involves [architecture change / new dependency / scope expansion].

Consider running critical analysis first:

/advise "{user's proposal}"

This will provide:
- Alignment check with PROJECT.md
- Complexity assessment
- Trade-off analysis
- Alternative approaches
- Risk identification

Takes 2-3 minutes, could save weeks.

Proceed with analysis? [Y/n]

Configuration

# .claude/config.yml
advisor_triggers:
  enabled: true

  # Sensitivity
  sensitivity: medium  # low | medium | high

  # Specific triggers
  triggers:
    new_dependencies: true
    architecture_changes: true
    scope_expansions: true
    technology_swaps: true
    scale_changes: true

  # Auto-activation (don't ask, just run)
  auto_activate: false  # If true, runs /advise automatically

Integration Points

Point 1: Before /plan Command

User: "Let's add Redis caching"
  ↓
advisor-triggers: Detected new dependency
  ↓
[Suggest /advise]
  ↓
User: Accepts suggestion
  ↓
/advise "Add Redis caching"
  ↓
User: Reviews analysis, decides
  ↓
/plan [chosen approach]

Point 2: Before /auto-implement

User: "/auto-implement add WebSocket support"
  ↓
advisor-triggers: Detected architecture change
  ↓
[Suggest /advise first]
  ↓
User: Either runs /advise or proceeds anyway

Point 3: In Orchestrator Agent

orchestrator receives feature request
  ↓
Check advisor-triggers
  ↓
IF significant decision detected
  ↓
Invoke advisor agent first
  ↓
Present analysis to user
  ↓
THEN proceed with planning

False Positives

Some requests trigger falsely:

False Positive:

  • "Fix bug in Redis connection" ← mentions Redis but not adding it
  • "Document the microservices" ← mentions architecture but not changing it

Solution: Context-aware detection:

// Only trigger if action verb present
if (containsActionVerb(request) && containsTriggerKeyword(request)) {
  return true;
}

Override

Users can bypass:

# Explicit skip
/plan --skip-advisor "Add Redis caching"

# Or acknowledge in prompt
"Add Redis caching (already analyzed, proceeding)"

Success Metrics

This skill is successful if:

  • ✅ Catches 80%+ of significant decisions
  • ✅ False positive rate < 20%
  • ✅ Users find suggestions helpful (not annoying)
  • ✅ Reduces regretted decisions (measured via rollbacks)

Example Outputs

Example 1: New Dependency

User: "Let's add Elasticsearch for search"

⚠️ Significant decision detected

Your request involves adding a new dependency (Elasticsearch).

Consider critical analysis first:
  /advise "Add Elasticsearch for full-text search"

This will check:
  - Alignment with PROJECT.md goals
  - Complexity cost (Elasticsearch cluster, maintenance)
  - Alternatives (PostgreSQL full-text search, simple indexing)
  - Trade-offs (features vs operational complexity)

Takes 2-3 minutes. Run analysis? [Y/n]

Example 2: Architecture Change

User: "Refactor to event-driven architecture"

⚠️ Significant decision detected

Your request involves a major architectural change.

Consider critical analysis first:
  /advise "Refactor to event-driven architecture"

This will evaluate:
  - Alignment with current architecture (PROJECT.md:78)
  - Migration complexity (message bus, event schemas)
  - Pros/cons of event-driven vs current approach
  - Alternative patterns (queue-based, CQRS lite)

This is a 6-8 week decision. Run analysis? [Y/n]

Example 3: Scope Expansion

User: "Also add mobile app support"

⚠️ Significant decision detected

Your request expands project scope to mobile platforms.

Consider critical analysis first:
  /advise "Add mobile app (iOS + Android)"

This will check:
  - Alignment with PROJECT.md scope (currently web-only)
  - Effort estimate (React Native vs native vs PWA)
  - Trade-offs (mobile features vs maintenance burden)
  - MVP options (PWA first, native later)

Major scope change. Run analysis? [Y/n]

Disabling

If users find this annoying:

# Disable globally
echo "advisor_triggers:\n  enabled: false" >> .claude/config.yml

# Or reduce sensitivity
echo "advisor_triggers:\n  sensitivity: low" >> .claude/config.yml

Version History

  • 1.0.0 (2025-10-26): Initial release

- Pattern detection for 5 trigger types - Configurable sensitivity - Integration with /advise command


Philosophy: Help users pause and think before committing to significant changes. The goal is not to slow down development, but to prevent costly mistakes.

平台分布

Codex

35.48%
按下载量换算55

Claude

29.75%
按下载量换算46

Cursor

19.91%
按下载量换算31

Gemini CLI

8.98%
按下载量换算14

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

权限未标注

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills