Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

comprehensive-analysis(综合分析)

comprehensive-analysis 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。

comprehensive-analysis 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,权限为执行命令;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 64,698。

总安装 294周安装 12GitHub Stars 374下载 95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:comprehensive-analysis(综合分析)
来源仓库:https://github.com/huytieu/cog-second-brain
仓库路径:skills/comprehensive-analysis
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/huytieu/cog-second-brain --skill comprehensive-analysis
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/huytieu/cog-second-brain --skill comprehensive-analysis

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。

提供团队或产品健康度的多维度深度分析报告生成能力。支持 GitHub、Linear、PostHog 等多源数据并行整理与分析。适用于周会复盘、战略调整前的全面态势评估需求。在 team mode 下可启动多个子代理并行处理不同分析维度。安装前建议确认第三方平台 API 访问权限与数据隐私合规性。

来源仓库内路径:skills/comprehensive-analysis

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/huytieu/cog-second-brain --skill comprehensive…;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

    它需要执行命令,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

comprehensive-analysis 怎么安装?

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

comprehensive-analysis 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。

comprehensive-analysis 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/huytieu/cog-second-brain --skill comprehensive-analysis 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。

comprehensive-analysis 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。

comprehensive-analysis 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 294 次,近一周安装 12 次,下载 95 次,GitHub 374 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。

comprehensive-analysis 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

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 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

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 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
comprehensive-analysis

综合分析 · 本页

294374执行命令未明确通过

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

COG Comprehensive Analysis Skill

When to Invoke

  • User wants a weekly review or retro prep
  • User says "weekly analysis", "comprehensive review", "board prep", "deep dive"
  • User needs analysis across a longer time period (7+ days)
  • User wants a full picture of team/product health

Agent Mode Awareness

Check agent_mode in 00-inbox/MY-PROFILE.md frontmatter:

  • If agent_mode: team — use the full parallel agent execution strategy below (5 agents). This skill benefits greatly from team mode.
  • If agent_mode: solo — run a lighter version: collect GitHub + Linear data sequentially, skip PostHog deep analysis, produce a single combined report instead of 3 documents.

Purpose

Generate a deep-dive analysis across all data sources for weekly reviews, board prep, strategic planning, or any time you need the full picture. Unlike the team brief (which optimizes for speed and daily relevance), this skill intentionally pulls more data and spends more time synthesizing.

Use this when:

  • Weekly team review / retro prep
  • Board meeting or leadership update prep
  • Strategic planning sessions
  • Investigating a specific problem across all data sources
  • Monthly/quarterly health check

Don't use this daily — it takes 8-12 minutes and pulls heavy payloads. Use /daily-brief for everyday intel.

Command: /comprehensive-analysis

Voice & Tone

Same as the daily brief — direct, opinionated, teammate energy. But with more depth and nuance. You're writing for a product leader who needs to make decisions, not just stay informed.


Execution Strategy

Phase 1: Deep Data Collection (~3-5 min)

Launch ALL agents in parallel using the Task tool with run_in_background: true.

Agent 1: "github-deep-analyst" (subagent_type: general-purpose)
Deep GitHub analysis for [CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo].
Analysis period: last 7 days (from [7_DAYS_AGO] to [TODAY]).

Collect:
1. ALL PRs merged in the last 7 days:
   gh pr list --repo [CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo] --state merged --search "merged:>=[7_DAYS_AGO]" --json number,title,author,mergedAt,labels,additions,deletions --limit 100

2. ALL open PRs with full detail:
   gh pr list --repo [CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo] --state open --json number,title,author,createdAt,reviewDecision,labels,updatedAt,additions,deletions --limit 100

3. Contributor activity breakdown:
   For each contributor, count: PRs merged, PRs opened, commits, review comments given.
   gh api repos/[CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo]/stats/contributors

4. Code frequency (additions/deletions per week):
   gh api repos/[CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo]/stats/code_frequency

5. Commit activity by day:
   gh api repos/[CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo]/stats/commit_activity

6. ALL PR review comments from the last 7 days:
   gh api repos/[CUSTOMIZE: your-org/your-repo]/pulls/comments --paginate --jq '[.[] | select(.created_at >= "[7_DAYS_AGO]")]'

DEEP ANALYSIS:
A) **Contributor Velocity Matrix**: For each contributor — PRs merged, lines changed, review comments given/received. Who's shipping? Who's reviewing? Who's doing both?
B) **Code Churn**: Are we rewriting the same files repeatedly? Flag files with >3 PRs touching them in one week.
C) **PR Lifecycle**: Average time from PR open → first review → merge. Where's the bottleneck?
D) **Review Quality**: Are reviews substantive (comments with suggestions) or rubber stamps (approved with no comments)?
E) **Week-over-Week Trends**: Compare this week's velocity to last week. Accelerating or decelerating?
F) **Technical Debt Signals**: Large PRs with no tests, PRs that touch >10 files, dependency-only PRs.

Return structured data AND insights.
Agent 2: "slack-deep-monitor" (subagent_type: general-purpose)

*Only spawn if Slack MCP is available*

Deep Slack analysis for last 7 days across key channels.
Analysis period: [7_DAYS_AGO] to [TODAY].

Instructions:
1. Use ToolSearch to load Slack tools
2. Read messages from [CUSTOMIZE: your-team-channel] for the full 7-day window
3. If you have access, also check: [CUSTOMIZE: additional-channels] (e.g., #general, #engineering, #product)

For EACH significant thread (>3 replies or involving decisions):
- Full topic summary
- Key participants
- Decision reached (or explicitly: "no decision reached")
- Action items with owners
- Sentiment (positive/negative/neutral/heated)
- Links to external resources shared

DEEP ANALYSIS:
A) **Communication Patterns**: Who's driving discussions? Who's mostly silent? Any asymmetry?
B) **Decision Velocity**: How many decisions were made vs. how many discussions ended without resolution?
C) **Topic Clustering**: Group discussions by theme (product, engineering, bugs, strategy, etc.)
D) **Unresolved Threads**: List all discussions that need follow-up — no decision, open question, blocked waiting for someone
E) **Sentiment Map**: Overall team mood. Are discussions constructive or frustrated?
F) **External Intel**: All links shared (articles, competitor news, tools) — categorize by relevance

Return structured data AND insights.
Agent 3: "linear-deep-tracker" (subagent_type: general-purpose)

*Only spawn if Linear MCP is available*

Deep Linear analysis for last 7 days.
Analysis period: [7_DAYS_AGO] to [TODAY].

Instructions:
1. Use ToolSearch to load ALL Linear tools
2. Collect comprehensive data:

   a) All issues updated in last 7 days (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__list_issues)
   b) All issues created in last 7 days
   c) All issues completed in last 7 days
   d) All blocked issues (any date)
   e) Full initiative list with projects (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__list_initiatives)
   f) Detailed status for each initiative (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__get_initiative)
   g) All active cycles (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__list_cycles)
   h) All milestones for active projects (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__list_milestones)
   i) All projects with progress (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__list_projects)
   j) Recent status updates (mcp__claude_ai_Linear__get_status_updates) for each initiative

DEEP ANALYSIS:
A) **Initiative Trajectory**: For each initiative, model whether current velocity will hit the target date. Use issues_completed_per_week vs. issues_remaining / weeks_remaining.
B) **Cycle History**: Compare current cycle progress to previous cycles. Are we improving?
C) **Scope Creep Quantified**: How many issues were added mid-cycle vs. planned at start?
D) **Priority Drift**: Issues that changed priority during the week. Why?
E) **Assignee Load Balance**: Distribution of issues across team members. Overloaded? Underutilized?
F) **Stale In-Progress**: Issues marked "In Progress" for >5 days with no status change.
G) **Dependency Map**: Issues that block other issues. What's the critical path?
H) **Label/Project Distribution**: Where is effort being spent? Does it align with initiative priorities?

Return structured data AND insights.
Agent 4: "posthog-deep-analyst" (subagent_type: general-purpose)

*Only spawn if PostHog MCP is available*

WARNING: PostHog can return very large payloads. This agent is intentionally heavy — it's the reason this skill takes longer than the daily brief. Scope queries carefully.
Deep PostHog analysis for last 7 days.
Project ID: [CUSTOMIZE: your-posthog-project-id].
Analysis period: [7_DAYS_AGO] to [TODAY].

Instructions:
1. Use ToolSearch to load PostHog tools (search "+posthog")
2. Run these analyses:

   === CORE METRICS (7-day window) ===

   a) Daily visitors, sign-ups, and core events — broken out by day:
      Use mcp__posthog__query-run with HogQL:
      SELECT toDate(timestamp) as day, count(DISTINCT person_id) as unique_users, count() as events
      FROM events WHERE event = '$pageview' AND timestamp >= '[7_DAYS_AGO]'
      GROUP BY day ORDER BY day

   b) Same for sign-ups and core value events (separate queries)

   c) Week-over-week comparison:
      Compare [7_DAYS_AGO to TODAY] vs [14_DAYS_AGO to 7_DAYS_AGO]

   === FUNNEL ANALYSIS ===

   d) Key funnel (sign-up → first core action → repeat):
      Use mcp__posthog__insight-query or HogQL to build a funnel:
      - Step 1: user_signed_up
      - Step 2: [CUSTOMIZE: your_core_event] (first time)
      - Step 3: [CUSTOMIZE: your_core_event] (second time, >24h later)
      Compare this week's funnel to last week's.

   === FEATURE ADOPTION ===

   e) Feature usage matrix:
      SELECT event, count() as uses, count(DISTINCT person_id) as unique_users
      FROM events WHERE timestamp >= '[7_DAYS_AGO]' AND event NOT LIKE '$%'
      GROUP BY event ORDER BY unique_users DESC LIMIT 25

   f) New vs returning user behavior:
      Compare event types for users whose first_seen is within last 7 days vs. older users.

   === ERROR ANALYSIS ===

   g) Error trends:
      Use mcp__posthog__list-errors for the period. Group by error type.

   h) Error-to-deploy correlation:
      For each error spike, check the timestamp against known deploy times (from GitHub merged PR data).

DEEP ANALYSIS:
A) **Growth Trajectory**: At current rate, where will key metrics be in 30/60/90 days?
B) **Funnel Health**: Where do users drop off? Has it improved or degraded vs last week?
C) **Feature Value Matrix**: Which features correlate with retention? (users who use feature X come back more)
D) **New User Experience**: First-session behavior patterns. What do new users do? Where do they get stuck?
E) **Error Impact**: Which errors affect the most users? Which are increasing fastest?
F) **Engagement Segments**: Power users vs casual vs churned. How big is each segment?

Return structured data AND insights with trends.
Agent 5: "meeting-deep-reviewer" (subagent_type: general-purpose)
Review ALL meeting notes from the last 7 days.
Analysis period: [7_DAYS_AGO] to [TODAY].

Instructions:
1. Glob for ALL meeting files in [CUSTOMIZE: path/to/meetings/] from the last 7 days
2. Also check [CUSTOMIZE: path/to/checkins/] for daily checkins
3. Read all found files

For EACH meeting, extract the same items as the daily brief agent.

DEEP ANALYSIS:
A) **Action Item Completion Rate**: Of all action items assigned in meetings this week, how many have corresponding GitHub/Linear activity?
B) **Decision Log**: Comprehensive list of every decision made this week, with context and who made it.
C) **Priority Shifts**: Did priorities change during the week? Track what was said Monday vs. Friday.
D) **Commitment Tracking**: Did people do what they said they'd do? (Cross-reference with GitHub/Linear data)
E) **Meeting Effectiveness**: Are meetings producing decisions and action items, or just discussion?

Return structured data AND insights.

Phase 2: Deep Synthesis (~2-3 min)

After all agents complete, the orchestrator performs deep cross-referencing:

  1. All 23 cross-reference patterns from the daily brief (see daily-brief.md)
  2. Additional comprehensive patterns:

- Week-over-week velocity trend: Is the team accelerating or decelerating? Why? - Initiative trajectory modeling: At current pace, will each initiative hit its target? What needs to change? - Team capacity assessment: Based on actual output this week, what's realistic for next week? - Risk register: Compile all risks from all sources into a unified risk register with severity/likelihood/owner - Strategic alignment check: Is what the team is building aligned with what leadership discussed in meetings? - Product-market signal synthesis: Combine PostHog data + Slack user feedback + meeting customer discussions into a coherent product signal

  1. Generate three output documents:
Output 1: Executive Summary (for leadership)
  • 1-page max
  • Key metrics with trends
  • Initiative health dashboard
  • Top 3 risks
  • Top 3 wins
  • Recommendation for next week's focus
Output 2: Team Report (for engineering)
  • What shipped this week (celebrate!)
  • Velocity and contributor stats
  • Review health (bottlenecks, rubber stamps)
  • Stale PRs and blocked issues
  • Technical debt signals
  • Next week's priorities from meetings
Output 3: Product Report (for stakeholders)
  • User metrics with trends
  • Funnel analysis
  • Feature adoption
  • Customer feedback synthesis (from Slack)
  • Growth trajectory
  • Product risks and opportunities
  1. Save all three to [CUSTOMIZE: path/to/briefs/]:

- comprehensive-analysis-YYYY-MM-DD.md (full report) - executive-summary-YYYY-MM-DD.md (leadership version) - product-report-YYYY-MM-DD.md (stakeholder version)

Phase 3: Output & Distribution (~1-2 min)

  1. Present the executive summary to the user
  2. Offer to publish to HackMD (same pattern as daily brief Phase 3.7)
  3. Offer to post highlights to Slack (same pattern as daily brief Phase 4)

Metadata Template

---
type: comprehensive-analysis
domain: shared
date: YYYY-MM-DD
analysis_period:
  start: YYYY-MM-DD
  end: YYYY-MM-DD
  days: 7
created: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM
tags:
  - comprehensive-analysis
  - weekly-review
  - team-intelligence
data_sources:
  github: true
  slack: true/false
  linear: true/false
  posthog: true/false
  meetings: true/false
  braindumps: true/false
metrics:
  prs_merged: X
  prs_opened: X
  commits: X
  active_contributors: X
  issues_completed: X
  issues_created: X
  visitors: X
  visitors_wow_change_pct: X
  signups: X
  core_events: X
  new_errors: X
initiatives:
  - name: "[CUSTOMIZE: Initiative 1]"
    health: on_track / at_risk / off_track
    progress_pct: X
    trajectory: will_hit / at_risk / will_miss
    days_remaining: X
team_velocity:
  this_week: X  # PRs merged
  last_week: X
  trend: accelerating / stable / decelerating
risks:
  - severity: high/medium/low
    description: ""
    owner: ""
    source: ""
---

Fallback Behavior

Same as daily brief — each data source is optional. The analysis degrades gracefully.

The minimum useful configuration is GitHub only — you'll still get velocity analysis, PR lifecycle metrics, contributor stats, and code churn detection.

Error Handling

Same safety rules as the daily brief, with one addition:

  • Context overflow protection: If any agent returns data that seems too large (>50k tokens estimated), log a warning and ask the agent to summarize more aggressively. This is most likely to happen with PostHog (large dashboard dumps) or Jira (broad JQL queries).

平台分布

Codex

34.73%
按下载量换算33

Claude

31.54%
按下载量换算30

Cursor

20.1%
按下载量换算19

Gemini CLI

9.96%
按下载量换算9

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/huytieu/cog-second-brain --skill comprehensive-analysis 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。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