Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

code-comments(代码注释)

code-comments 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。

code-comments 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,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 17,452。

总安装 412周安装 17GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 135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:code-comments(代码注释)
来源仓库:https://github.com/caidanw/skills
仓库路径:skills/code-comments
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/caidanw/skills --skill code-comments
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/caidanw/skills --skill code-comments

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。

code-comments 倡导“代码讲清 what,注释说明 why”的原则,减少冗余注释与误解风险。适用于注重长期维护性的项目,通过清晰命名与局部注释提升可读性。提出四步判断法:重命名→重构→必要时加短注释,确保注释价值最大化。使用前请结合项目语言惯例(如 JSDoc、GoDoc),保持注释风格统一。

注释内容应聚焦业务逻辑而非语法细节,避免随代码变动而过时失效。

来源仓库内路径:skills/code-comments

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/caidanw/skills --skill code-comments;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

code-comments 怎么安装?

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

code-comments 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。

code-comments 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。

code-comments 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。

code-comments 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 412 次,近一周安装 17 次,下载 135 次。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。

code-comments 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
code-comments

代码注释 · 本页

412—操作浏览器未明确通过

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

Code Comments

Write code so the structure explains the what. Write comments so future humans and agents understand the why, why not, what must stay true, and what already happened here.

Core Rule

Use this order:

1. Rename, extract, reorder, or delete code until the intent is obvious
2. Add a comment only when the missing context cannot live in code
3. Put the shortest useful comment as close as possible to the code
4. Keep the comment short, local, and durable

Good comments reduce wrong edits. Great comments stop humans and agents from repeating old mistakes.

The Comment Test

Before writing a comment, ask:

Can clearer code remove the need for this comment?
  Yes -> refactor first
  No  -> comment the missing context

Will this comment still be true after a small refactor?
  No  -> move the detail into code or delete it
  Yes -> keep it

Does this comment tell the reader something the code cannot?
  No  -> delete it
  Yes -> keep it

What To Comment

Comments earn their keep when they capture one of these:

Intent

Why this code exists.

// Normalize partner payloads here so the rest of the pipeline can assume
// internal field names and avoid partner-specific branches.

Constraint

A rule the code must respect because of product, legal, protocol, or platform limits.

// Keep card brand names verbatim for PCI audit exports.
// Product copy uses friendly labels elsewhere, but not in this file.

Invariant

A property that must remain true across future changes.

// INVARIANT: cache keys must include tenantId.
// Cross-tenant collisions become data leaks, not cache misses.

Tradeoff

Why a less-obvious implementation beat the simpler-looking one.

// We batch writes every 250ms to cut lock contention.
// Immediate writes looked simpler but doubled p95 latency in production.

History

What already happened that future editors should know.

// Keep the retry delay capped at 5s.
// A longer backoff caused checkout sessions to expire during incident 2024-11-18.

Warning

What not to "simplify" and why.

// Do not collapse this into a single upsert.
// Duplicate webhooks can arrive out of order; the two-step write is intentional.

Reference

Where the deeper story lives.

// CSV escaping follows RFC 4180 with an Excel-specific quoting carve-out.

What Not To Comment

Do not comment things that should live in code.

Bad:

// Increment retry count
retryCount += 1

// Get user by id
const user = await getUserById(userId)

Better:

retryCount += 1
const user = await getUserById(userId)

Bad:

// Build request
const req = buildPaymentRequest(order)

Better:

const paymentRequest = buildPaymentRequest(order)

If a comment only translates weak names into better English, fix the names.

Write For Three Audiences

Every high-signal comment should help all three:

  1. Your future self scanning the file at speed
  2. A teammate without the original decision context
  3. A coding agent proposing edits from local evidence only

That means:

  • Prefer explicit nouns over vague pronouns
  • Name the thing that would break
  • State the consequence, not just the preference
  • Use issue or incident ids when they exist
  • Keep comments local and durable

Inline Comment Templates

Use these templates directly. Replace brackets with concrete facts.

Decision Comment

// Use [approach] because [constraint/tradeoff].
// [Alternative] looked simpler but failed on [case]. See [issue/incident].

Example:

// Use a stable sort because invoice lines with equal priority must keep upload order.
// Hash bucketing looked simpler but changed exported totals. See issue #214.

Invariant Comment

// INVARIANT: [property that must remain true].
// If this changes, [bad outcome].

Example:

// INVARIANT: every audit event must include actorId, even for system actions.
// If this changes, backfills and incident review lose causality.

Compatibility Comment

// Keep [odd code] for [browser/vendor/legacy system] compatibility.
// Remove only after [condition].

Example:

// Keep CRLF line endings for the bank import tool.
// Remove only after finance confirms parser v3 is live in all regions.

Incident Breadcrumb

// Added after [incident/bug].
// This guards against [failure mode] when [trigger].

Example:

// Added after INC-482.
// This guards against duplicate shipment creation when the carrier webhook retries.

Temporary Work Comment

// TEMP: [workaround].
// Remove after [specific event/version/date owner], not "later".

Example:

// TEMP: skip image optimization for SVG uploads.
// Remove after `media-service` 2.4 lands and backfill job completes.

Non-Obvious Example Comment

// Example: [input] -> [output].
// This matters because [surprising rule].

Example:

// Example: " ACME-01 " -> "acme-01".
// This matters because partner ids are case-insensitive but whitespace-significant upstream.

Docstrings And API Comments

Docstrings should describe contract, side effects, and sharp edges. Do not restate the implementation.

Bad:

def sync_users():
    """Sync users from the API."""

Better:

def sync_users():
    """Pull active users from the billing API and upsert local records.

    Side effects:
    - writes `users` and `subscriptions`
    - emits `user_synced` events

    Safe to retry. Not safe to run concurrently for the same account.
    """

Prefer this structure when the boundary matters:

What it guarantees
What it mutates or emits
What callers must provide
When it is unsafe or expensive

Anti-Patterns

Narration

// Loop through items
for (const item of items) {

The code already says this.

Name Translation

// User's email address
const eml = user.email

Rename eml or delete the comment.

Vague Intent

// Handle edge case

Name the edge case and consequence.

Fake Temporariness

// TEMP: remove later

This never gets removed. Say when, after what, and by whom if needed.

Ghost History

// Weird bug fix

Which bug? Under what condition? What breaks if removed?

Comment Drift

// Returns a list sorted by createdAt ascending
return users.sort((a, b) => b.createdAt - a.createdAt)

Stale comments are worse than no comments.

Essay Comments

Do not bury the point in five lines of setup. Lead with the rule or decision, then add one sentence of context if needed.

Review Checklist

Before keeping a comment, check all of these:

[] Does the code already say this?
[] Does the comment explain why, constraint, invariant, tradeoff, history, or warning?
[] Is the comment specific about what breaks or matters?
[] Will the comment likely survive a routine refactor?
[] Should any extra detail be cut because the local comment is already enough?
[] Did I include a reference if the decision came from an issue, incident, or RFC?
[] Would this comment stop a smart agent from making the wrong cleanup?

If the answer to the last question is no, the comment may not be pulling its weight.

Editing Workflow

When modifying code:

1. Delete comments made obsolete by your change
2. Rewrite comments whose scope changed
3. Add a short decision comment if the new code looks "weird" for a reason
4. Leave the file with fewer, better comments than you found it

Default Style

  • Use short sentences
  • Lead with the decision or warning
  • Name concrete systems, fields, incidents, or documents
  • Prefer Do not... because... over soft phrasing
  • Prefer one strong comment over three weak ones
  • Avoid jokes, filler, and private context nobody else can recover

The goal is not more comments. The goal is better evidence for future readers and future agents.

平台分布

Codex

36.23%
按下载量换算49

Claude

32.78%
按下载量换算44

Cursor

18.66%
按下载量换算25

Gemini CLI

10.08%
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

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。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