Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

plannotator(plannotator 命令行)

plannotator 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。

plannotator 是开发类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为操作浏览器;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 13,638。

总安装 857周安装 35GitHub Stars 11下载 277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:plannotator(plannotator 命令行)
来源仓库:https://github.com/akillness/skills-template
仓库路径:skills/plannotator
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/skills-template --skill plannotator
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/akillness/skills-template --skill plannotator

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

plannotator 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。作为人工审批网关,用于审查代理生成的计划或差异后再进入执行阶段。

通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需结合原始 README 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操作。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/plannotator

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/akillness/skills-template --skill plannotator;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

    它需要操作浏览器,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

plannotator 怎么安装?

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

plannotator 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。

plannotator 需要什么权限?

权限级别是操作浏览器。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。

plannotator 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。

plannotator 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 857 次,近一周安装 35 次,下载 277 次,GitHub 11 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。

plannotator 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

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。

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。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、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。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
plannotator

plannotator 命令行 · 本页

85711操作浏览器未明确未通过

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

plannotator

Use this skill when the main job is reviewing an agent-produced plan or diff in a visual UI before work proceeds.

plannotator is the human approval gate, not the planner itself. It sits between:

  • plan/spec creation (task-planning, ralph)
  • execution orchestration (jeo, vibe-kanban, bmad)
  • downstream code/UI feedback (code-review, agentation)

Read these support docs before making setup or routing decisions:

When to use this skill

  • A coding agent already produced an implementation plan and a human must approve or request changes before coding starts
  • You want to review a git diff visually after implementation and send targeted feedback
  • You need a browser-based annotation loop instead of a long chat reply
  • You want to save reviewed plans to Obsidian or Bear after approval or for team reference
  • You need a clear install / integration path for Claude Code, Codex CLI, Gemini CLI, or OpenCode

When not to use this skill

  • The main job is creating or improving the plan itself → use task-planning, ralph, or another planning/spec skill first
  • The main job is broad PR judgment, policy review, or risk-based approval criteria → use code-review
  • The main job is UI screenshot annotation that should drive code fixes → use agentation
  • The main job is orchestration, kanban movement, or multi-agent execution state → use jeo or vibe-kanban
  • The main job is generic note-taking or wiki curation → use obsidian / llm-wiki

Instructions

Step 1: Classify the review mode

Normalize the request into one primary mode:

plannotator_mode:
  primary_mode: plan-review | diff-review | note-export | platform-setup | troubleshooting
  artifact_ready: yes | no
  platform: claude | codex | gemini | opencode | unknown
  feedback_goal: approve | request-changes | archive | unknown
  repo_context: git-repo | markdown-only | remote-container | unknown

Use one primary mode per run. If the user is vague, default to the smallest obvious interpretation:

  • existing plan to review → plan-review
  • existing code changes to inspect → diff-review
  • save reviewed plan → note-export
  • install/integrate plannotator → platform-setup

Step 2: Verify the artifact exists before opening review

plannotator is only useful once something concrete exists.

Checklist:

  1. A plan, diff, or markdown file already exists.
  2. The user wants human review, not plan generation.
  3. For diff review, a git repo or commit range is available.
  4. For note export, plannotator is running in the right mode and saving is configured.

If the artifact is missing, route out instead of forcing the review tool.

Step 3: Choose the smallest review path

A. Plan review

Use when a plan exists and the human wants to approve or request changes before execution.

Typical flow:

  1. Ensure plannotator is installed and integrated for the current platform.
  2. Trigger the plan-review UI from the platform’s normal plan/hook flow.
  3. Annotate with one concrete intent at a time:

- delete - insert - replace - comment

  1. End in one explicit outcome:

- Approve → implementation can proceed - Request changes → agent replans with structured feedback - Archive / save → store the plan without advancing work

B. Diff review

Use when the code already changed and the human wants visual line-level review.

Typical flow:

# current working tree
bash scripts/review.sh

# specific commit
bash scripts/review.sh HEAD~1

# branch diff
bash scripts/review.sh main...HEAD

Use diff review when the code exists. If the user is still deciding the approach, route back to plan review first.

C. Note export

Use when the review result should be saved to Obsidian or Bear.

Use this only after confirming the relevant save path is configured. Keep note export secondary to the review decision; it is not the main trigger for the skill.

D. Platform setup

Use when the user needs plannotator installed or connected to Claude / Codex / Gemini / OpenCode.

Start with:

bash scripts/install.sh
bash scripts/check-status.sh

Then choose the platform-specific setup from references/platform-setup.md.

Step 4: Keep boundaries explicit

Use these route-outs aggressively:

  • Need the plan written or refined? → task-planning, ralph
  • Need a broader approval / risk / correctness review of code changes? → code-review
  • Need UI screenshot markup that should turn into code fixes? → agentation
  • Need orchestration state, ledger updates, or multi-agent gating? → jeo, vibe-kanban
  • Need note-system management beyond reviewed plan export? → obsidian, llm-wiki

Step 5: Prefer structured, low-ambiguity annotations

Good annotations are:

  • narrow
  • tied to one issue
  • actionable
  • anchored to a specific plan step or diff line range
  • explicit about expected acceptance criteria

Bad annotations are:

  • vague (“this feels wrong”)
  • multi-issue bundles
  • generic style commentary with no requested change
  • hidden planning work that should have happened before review

Step 6: Use the script bundle instead of ad hoc commands

Available scripts:

  • scripts/install.sh — install CLI and optional integrations
  • scripts/setup-hook.sh — Claude Code hook setup
  • scripts/setup-gemini-hook.sh — Gemini setup
  • scripts/setup-codex-hook.sh — Codex setup
  • scripts/setup-opencode-plugin.sh — OpenCode setup
  • scripts/check-status.sh — integration/status verification
  • scripts/configure-remote.sh — remote/devcontainer/WSL setup
  • scripts/review.sh — diff review launcher

If you need the exact per-platform commands, caveats, or remote-mode notes, read the support references instead of bloating the main flow.

Step 7: Return one of these output shapes

Preferred outputs:

# plannotator Review Brief

## Mode
- Primary mode:
- Why it fits:

## Artifact
- What is being reviewed:
- Review surface:
- Platform:

## Next action
1. command / trigger
2. review action
3. outcome decision

## Route-outs
- Neighboring skills to use before/after this step:

## Risks / caveats
- Setup prerequisites:
- Known limitations:

Or:

# plannotator Setup Brief

## Platform
- Claude / Codex / Gemini / OpenCode

## Install
- exact commands

## Verification
- status checks
- how to trigger review

## Caveats
- remote mode / note export / known limitations

Examples

Example 1: Plan approval gate

Input

The agent proposed a 6-step implementation plan. I want to inspect it visually and either approve it or send corrections back before coding starts.

Good output direction

  • mode: plan-review
  • verify the plan already exists
  • trigger plannotator through the platform’s normal plan-review flow
  • annotate one issue per change
  • finish with approve vs request-changes
  • route plan-creation work back to task-planning if the plan is missing or too immature

Example 2: Review a recent code diff

Input

The agent already changed three files. Open the visual diff review and let me mark up the changes.

Good output direction

  • mode: diff-review
  • verify git repo / diff range
  • use bash scripts/review.sh with the right target
  • keep broader approval-policy questions routed to code-review

Example 3: Save reviewed plans to notes

Input

I want reviewed plans saved to Obsidian so my team can revisit them later.

Good output direction

  • mode: note-export
  • verify save integration prerequisites and hook-mode caveat
  • explain how review output gets saved
  • route broader vault-management work to note-taking skills

Best practices

  1. Treat plannotator as the visual approval gate, not the planning engine.
  2. Review one concrete artifact at a time.
  3. Use one annotation per issue whenever possible.
  4. Keep the final outcome explicit: approve, request changes, or archive.
  5. Use scripts/check-status.sh before debugging cross-platform integration issues.
  6. Move platform/setup specifics into references so the core skill stays short and trigger-friendly.
  7. When in doubt, route planning/spec generation and orchestration state to neighboring skills instead of stretching this one.

References

平台分布

Codex

35.08%
按下载量换算97

Claude

27.17%
按下载量换算75

Cursor

18.47%
按下载量换算51

Gemini CLI

9.53%
按下载量换算26

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

未通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

未通过

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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